Entrepreneur the Arts » A-F

It’s Halftime in America…

Lisa Canning — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 01:30:55 +0000

Clint Eastwood was remarkable in the halftime Chrysler Commercial. Wow. So, what’s our strategy, America, for the second half?

Is it going to be about accepting and learning from a new breed of leader?

One who is socially conscious ethically bound creatively fueled and astonishingly- efficient?

The not for-profit-world, and the creative industries especially, are a gold mine for recruiting talent. All NFP leaders need is some for-profit entrepreneurial training to become REAL CHANGE AGENTS to fortune 1000. And to all you hard core NFP leaders- we need to fight for some funding innovation. Look what happened in Detroit. A big government INVESTMENT came along for our auto industry at the RIGHT TIME (aka now) and RAPID GROWTH and RECOVERY occurred.

And to all you foundations who don’t know how to deal with us up starts in your space? Not everything has to be old and established to be your next best investment. Get better at taking a few risks. We all have to.

And more government bailouts are not the answer either. How many gazillions pf dollars is Fortune 1000 sitting on overseas that is not being used productively? What our government needs to do is let some of that money come back home free of charge to fuel growth that emanates from the creative industries.

The creative not-for-profit industries have some remarkable people who with a little investment and a little education, and a ‘herd’ building mentality, could do a lot for our economic recovery while they change the world. It’s time America.

The Mistake that Topples Careers and Industries

David Cutler — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:00:29 +0000

During the second half of the 19^th Century, rail transportation in the United States was a booming enterprise. Expanding to every corner of the land, this lucrative growth industry seemed unstoppable. Yet within 70 years of its heyday, rail companies tumbled. And today, their impact of is negligible (beyond Amtrak and lines of Thomas the Tank Engine toys). What on Earth happened?

Well, the world changed. The advent of automobiles, trucks, buses, and airplanes simply made trains less necessary. Less relevant. So they faded away.

But what if these companies had maintained a broader vision? What if they hadn’t been here simply to support railway systems, but rather to solve transportation needs of all sorts? Had that been the case, these businesses might still be major players in air, land, and sea travel today.

The mistake of overspecialization has plagued virtually every industry, large or small. We’ve seen this sad tale play out time and time again.

In the arts, for example, consider record labels. So massive was their influence and power just 15 short years ago that the top handful of multi-billion dollar corporations were oft referred to as the “music industry.” But make no mistake. That’s not how they approached the game. Instead, they were the “sound-reproduced-on-physical-products-industry.” Which explains why the move from records to CDs worked so seamlessly. Yet when digital reproduction and distribution became reality, the consequences were devastating. Imagine how differently history might have been written had these companies truly seen themselves as the backbone of a comprehensive and ever evolving music business.

Or how about orchestras? These organizations boast a rich and glorious tradition. But even so, American orchestras today are declaring bankruptcy at an alarming rate. What business are they in? Serving as a cultural and creative hub? Transforming communities through music? Celebrating the unique artistic identity of a region? Not even close. Instead it’s much more narrowly defined: “Large ensemble music featuring a combination of strings, winds, and percussion performing primarily Western classical music by dead Europeans.” Hmmm…During this tumultuous time of disruptive change, couldn’t these ensembles rescue themselves from extinction by thinking wider and re-imagining core purpose?

What about your own career? Do you just do that one very specific thing (i.e. play classical oboe, choreograph ballet, paint landscape murals)? Or is your mission open and flexible, ensuring that your work will remain necessary, valuable, and valued no matter how much the world evolves, in any direction?

True, you can’t be all things to all people. True, there are tremendous benefits to addressing a particular niche. Just be sure that the positioning you choose is broad enough to ensure there will always be demand for your art.

2011 Best Reads for Artists and Leaders

David Cutler — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 12:00:31 +0000

Successful artists, leaders, entrepreneurs, and innovators have the most interesting ideas. Not just because they’re somehow magically smarter or more creative. Part of the formula is that these individuals are voracious readers, impacted dramatically by the perspectives of thought leaders. They’re also experts at synthesizing information—taking something intended to address one situation and adopting it to another. Reading the right books challenges how you think, expands your horizons, and helps you imagine new possibilities for your art.

Below are 10 of the most influential books I read in 2011. This year, my reading list focused around the topics of institutional change, education, leadership, business models, and marketing. Notice that not one of the titles on this year’s list is written specifically for artists. But all are deeply relevant to the challenges faced by this sector in our quickly changing world. I hope you’ll find some of these helpful and beneficial to your own evolution.

1) There’s a Customer Born Every Minute: P.T. Barnum’s Secrets to Business Success. By Joe Vitale. The world may be changing at a breakneck tempo, but what it takes to get noticed has not. This book examines the life and practices of the greatest arts entrepreneur of all times, circus mastermind P.T. Barnum. With engaging and powerful prose, this biographical account introduces ten “Rings of Power” that are spot on today for artists who hope to attract maximum attention. A great read!

2) The E-Myth Revisited: Why Most Small Businesses Don’t Work and What to Do About It. By Michael Gerber. While several points addressed here probably aren’t the right approach for artists running the small business of their career (he often points to the fast food McDonalds model), I learned a ton from this book and so will you. Gerber explains how to methodically create a business model and life that works for you, rather than being overwhelmed by the frantic antics practiced by most artists and small business owners. This will alter your approach to creating a career in the arts.

3) Linchpin: Are You Indispensible? By Seth Godin. When reading this, I was delighted to learn that “Our economy now rewards artists far more than any other economy in history ever has.” Wow!!! As someone who has devoted much life energy to helping artists maximize professional and personal success, this assertion definitely caught my attention. But just because you’re involved with the arts doesn’t make you an artist. So are you indispensible? (Find more thoughts HERE.)

4) Who Moved My Cheese? By Spencer Johnson. This short 94-page book takes literally less than an hour to read. It tells the story of two mice and two littlepeople who live off cheese in a maze. When their supply runs out, the mice immediate move on in search of new riches. But the smarter and more complex littlepeople have a much harder time adapting to their new circumstances. Throughout the evolutionary process, many valuable lessons are learned. Inspirational and vital words, especially during our industry’s current metamorphosis.

5) Buy In: Saving Your Good Idea from Getting Shot Down. By John P. Kotter. Let’s face it. No matter how good your idea, there will be scores of doubters and naysayers eager to tear it to shreds. Kotter urges that advocates of change initiatives welcome all feedback, even by the fiercest critics. He then outlines the four most common categories of idea squashing (fear mongering, delay, confusion, ridicule), and suggests appropriate and potent responses to the 24 most common attacks.

6) Change the Culture, Change the Game: The Breakthrough Strategy for Energizing Your Organization and Creating Accountability for Results. By Roger Connors and Tom Smith. Though the writing style of this book is a little dry and academic, it offers specific and actionable steps for changing institutional culture. To do this, the entire results pyramid must be altered—from bottom to top—Experiences, Beliefs, Actions, Results. A must read for any leader hoping to help evolve an arts organization or institution.

7) Catching Up or Leading the Way: American Education in the Age of Globalization. By Yong Zhao. Claiming that America’s pre-college education system is broken is about the least controversial claim one can make. For evidence, just consider our pathetic standardized test scores when compared with other first world nations. However, Zhao points out that China, South Korea, and other high scoring societies understand that their education system is also broken. Innovation, creativity, and leadership in these nations are disturbingly low. As they increasingly try to emulate aspects of American education, such as creativity and individualism, we ironically embrace ineffective measures that will not serve us well. A fascinating perspective, and one that suggests (among other things) the true potential of arts education.

8) In Defense of Elitism. By William Henry. After hearing a provocative talk by Norman Lebrecht suggesting that classical music become more elitist (my reflections HERE), a colleague suggested I read this. Without a doubt, it is the most controversial text I’ve read in years. Henry, the late NY Times reporter, argues that America has made a clear decision to embrace egalitarianism (the notion that everyone and every idea should be equal) over elitism (celebrating excellence) across the board. In terms of art, he argues that classical music is simply superior to pop music, end of story—a position far away from the egalitarian view I tend to espouse. Addressing everything from educaction to the job market, many of his points didn’t sit right with me, but others were quite compelling. If you want to be challenged, this book won’t disappoint.

9) Start Something that Matters. By Blake Mycoskie. The founder of the for-profit company TOMS, whose business donates a pair of shoes to poverty stricken children for every pair they sell, argues that giving is good business. “If you incorporate giving into your business and life, you will see greater returns and rewards than you ever imagined. So many good things happen to you when giving is integrated into your business—and I’m not even talking about the wonderful results of the giving itself…I’m talking about the business.” Inspirational, and a great position for artists.

10) The 29% Solution: 52 Networking Success Strategies. Though not particularly high-level or groundbreaking, this book provides many helpful networking strategies. It reminds us just how important word-of-mouth marketing is, and urges that hours each week be devoted to this practice. He also stresses that it’s not “net-SITting” or “net-EATing” but “net-WORKing.”

210 Social Innovation Funding Sources

Lisa Canning — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 13:15:37 +0000

Social Entrepreneur, Social Enterprise and Social Innovation Sources of Funding

Here is a list of 210 social entrepreneur, social enterprise and social innovation funding sources (#socent) that a group member in Impact Entrepreneur posted on Linkedin. This is the most comprehensive list anywhere as far as I know. If you see something missing, you can go to ned.com, join, and then be able to edit the page.

Venture philanthropy, seed stage investing for social entrepreneurs, early stage investing for social innovation

Crowdsourced Funding, Crowdfunding, and Peer-to-Peer Microfinance

Social Entrepreneur & Innovation Friendly Foundations

Top SE College Programs

Social Entrepreneur & Innovation Prize/Awards

Search Tools for Grant Funding

Crowdsourced Funding for Musicians & Bands

Business Model You

Lisa Canning — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 15:07:05 +0000

I am sitting here with coffee in hand, writing to you all from the French Quarter in beautiful New Orleans. I am at the U.S Association for. Small Business and Entrepreneurship Conference (USASBE). Today my colleague from University of Illinois, Joyce Thomas, and I present a paper on our learning model for The IAE.

One of the underpinnings of The Institute for Arts Entrepreneurship’s education model is how we use the Business Model Canvas. The Business Model Canvas is an analytical tool described in Business Model Generation. It is a visual template preformatted with the nine blocks of a business model, allowing users to diagram existing business models or conceive new ones. Check out the Canvas as it is used for organizations and for individuals.

In our model we have adapted the Canvas to be a Personal Canvas specifically designed to intuitively and emotionally address all 9 segments allowing creatives to understand business development from right to left. It is slightly different than the personal canvas that is about to be released in Business Model You.

If you are curious to know more, a 79-page, 9.3 MB preview of Business Model You is now available for download.

DOWNLOAD PREVIEW

CHICAGO: Join the IAE and WBEZ @ Catalyst Ranch to Celebrate Self Employment

Lisa Canning — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 07:20:00 +0000

On Thursday January 26th The Institute for Arts Entrepreneurship (IAE) will be teaming up with WBEZ’s new project Front & Center to host a resource fair for the self employed, small businesses, start-ups, and freelancers.

Mini seminars and presentations will run through out the evening at the fabulous Catalyst Ranch located at 656 W Randolph St # 3W in the Polka Room.

Mini Seminar Topics Include:

Entrepreneurship 101
Presented by Institute For Arts Entrepreneurship

Receiving small loans as an independent worker
Presented Accion Micro Lending

Doing your taxes as a freelancer, small business owner, or independent
Presented by Center for Economic Progress

Create. Innovate. Repeat: featuring 4 fabulous presenters, 7 slides and just 5 minutes each to pitch their most innovative business idea to you.
Presented by Institute for Arts Entrepreneurship.

Partial List of Participants Include:

Co-Lab Evanston providers of shared office spaces.

Northside Freelancers Network who can help you connect to the growing Chicago self-employed community. Make sure to ask them about their weekly “freelancers soup” lunch.

Accion will be on hand to discuss how to get a micro-loans to jump start your own business.

Northside Community Bank can help you find funding for your small, local project.

IndieMade is itself a small business. They create websites for independents, artist, small businesses, and start-up projects.

Rockstar CPA offers CPA services specifically geared towards the self-employed, with a specialty in creative projects.

The Law Project offer affordable legal resources for freelancers, independents, and small businesses, such as creating contracts, negotiating pay, etc.

Chicago! Come on out and celebrate self-employment with us! We hope to see you on January 26th.

Fair begins at 6pm @ Catalyst Ranch 656 W Randolph St # 3W, in the Polka Room

Artivate: A Journal of Entrepreneurship in the Arts

Lisa Canning — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 17:06:11 +0000

Dear Colleagues:

I am writing to let you know about an exciting new initiative and to ask that you forward this information to your professional networks. Artivate: A Journal of Entrepreneurship in the Arts (ISSN 2164-7747), the first ever peer-reviewed research journal in the field of arts entrepreneurship, will be published twice yearly beginning July 2012 in an online format.

The mission of Artivate is to disseminate new thinking and perspectives on arts entrepreneurship theory, practice, and pedagogy. The editors, Linda Essig, director of Arizona State University’s p.a.v.e program in arts entrepreneurship, and Gary Beckman of North Carolina State University’s program in entrepreneurial studies in the arts, are committed to publishing research-based articles and case studies of interest to scholars, artists, and students in the areas of entrepreneurship theory as applied to the arts; arts entrepreneurship education; arts management; arts and creative industries; public policy and the arts; the arts in community and economic development; nonprofit leadership; social entrepreneurship in or using the arts; evaluation and assessment; and public practice in the arts. Artivate’s diverse international editorial board includes Andrew Taylor (UW-Madison), Margaret Wyszomirski (OSU), Bill Gartner (Clemson), Lynn Book (Wake Forest), Christina Hong (Queensland University of Technology) , Ian David Moss (Fractured Atlas), Diane Ragsdale (Erasmus University), Paul van Zuilenberg (University of the Free State), Gordon Shockley (ASU) and others.

I paste below the call for submissions, due February 15. You may also visit the journal site at http://www.artivate.org Please forward this announcement to your professional networks, as appropriate.

Best wishes,

Professor Linda Essig
director, p.a.v.e program in arts entrepreneurship
Co-editor, Artivate.org
ASU School of Theatre and Film
PO Box 872002
Tempe AZ 85287
http://theatrefilm.asu.edu/initiatives/pave/

Call for Submissions

Artivate: A Journal of Entrepreneurship in the Arts is accepting submissions of articles for publication in its inaugural issue to be published July 2012. The first journal to focus on the emergent field of arts entrepreneurship, Artivate seeks works of original scholarship in the following areas: entrepreneurship theory as applied to the arts; arts entrepreneurship education; arts management; arts and creative industries; public policy and the arts; the arts in community and economic development; nonprofit leadership; social entrepreneurship in or using the arts; evaluation and assessment in and of the field; public practice in the arts. The editors are particularly interested in articles that actively link theory with practice in ways that will be of interest and impact to the broad cross-section of Artivate’s readership. Self-reflective studies from arts entrepreneurs and empirical research from scholars are equally welcome.

Artivate is a peer-reviewed online publication for an academic and practitioner audience. Editorial board members are affiliated with universities, foundations, and arts services organizations on three continents. The co-editors are Linda Essig, director of the p.a.v.e. program in arts entrepreneurship at Arizona State University, and Gary Beckman, director of entrepreneurial studies in the arts at North Carolina State University.
The editors are interested in supporting the growth of our nascent discipline and are committed to publishing at least one debut article from an emerging scholar in each issue. First-time authors are welcome to seek advice from the editors in advance of submission.

Submissions should be between 4,000 and 10,000 words in length. Articles must be submitted in a word format (doc or docx) with any figures or illustrations submitted either within the word document or as separate jpg files. Articles will be evaluated in a blind process so the articles themselves should include no identifying headers, footers, watermarks, or specific content (e.g. “at Jurassic University where I teach arts entrepreneurship”).

Submissions for consideration must be received via email no later than February 15, 2012. Email submissions simultaneously to linda.essig@asu.edu and gdbeckma@ncsu.edu

Happy 2012!

Lisa Canning — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 02:25:04 +0000

Dear Reader,

This blog has been an incredible labor of love. My labor has come from my deep desire to see the world of the arts evolve and change so that artists have a new voice and can develop and be recognized for their entrepreneurial talents by contribute their gifts in new ways.

As we begin our 7th year, I look back and realize that I have persevered relentlessly over the past 6 years because I believe so much in the power of artistry to change the world as we know it. I have invested a significant amount of my time and money into it, as a result, in hopes that the content here can develop shared language, create new meaning and be a useful resource for you to use in your entrepreneurial and creative development. I hope I am achieving my goal.

I wish you all a wonderful 2012 filled with hope, promise and prosperity.

Lisa Canning

Can creativity occupy the hearts and minds of the majority? or Lord hear my prayer.

Lisa Canning — Tue, 27 Dec 2011 23:49:36 +0000

A friend of mine recently reminded me that there is no need for creative entrepreneurial types like us to apologize for being “egocentric” in saying that creativity and innovation is scarce, while status quo “inside of the box” thinking is the great majority. It is a simple fact.

Unfortunately, “explaining” this to the “majority” is usually not possible or helpful because it requires experiential learning to truly develop ones creative abilities enough for anyone to really understand. What rules the heart can rule the mind but it does not work the other way around. A fundamental shift in the mix of who we highly value learning from, and how we learn, needs to take place for this to occur. It is no wonder societies and humans evolve so slowly despite all the knowledge and tools available to us.

And yet, I believe man was put on this earth to help God make progress on earth. Which, to honor him, requires us to be ethical bound, to morally act and requires tremendous creativity to do. And this single belief has profoundly motivated me through out my life to deepen my intellect, my empathy and my creativity so that I can use my skills to be of service, to the best of my ability, to everyone I know.

As I have grown up, I have increasingly come to recognize that this belief is often isolating and a cause for great misunderstanding. Developing my empathy, intellect and creativity has taught me how to see deeply and profoundly into others- which is not an easy thing, in this broken world, for others to accept as the gift you have to offer. And yet, as an artist, I have come to learn this is our profound gift to share with the world. It is not egocentric at all for me to say it is what artists have to offer and why God graced us all with the gift of life.

And yet, I find myself often in a space where I feel worried that my time on this earth will run out before I have realized this deep vision for the world I have- to occupy the hearts and minds of the majority with more creativity- to reach the tipping point of true change. It is an honest to goodness daily fear of mine. And it has often pushed me to feel the need to try and prove my worth with anyone I encounter in the majority in the hope that they will give me the opportunity to open up a whole new world of meaning to them- one that transcends the empty hunger for power and greed and utilize it for real progress on earth and societal good. And by doing so, for true sustainable prosperity to flow. It is hard not to want this for the world when these principals have profoundly served the development of my own life and my businesses and created so much prosperity and good.

While I have never apologized for my work, in some ways by trying to “prove” to others what deep value as an artist I hold, I think I have. While the majority entertains my beliefs about the ethical values one develops from the flow of heartfelt creativity, like a muse in the moment, it is short lived and not invested into to deepen its impact and to create true sustainable values. Is this really the only role my work can have?

Two years ago I was offered the opportunity of being mentored by a quickly rising entrepreneurial star in Chicago. He had built an amazing company from nothing, was featured on INC’s fastest growing list of companies for several years and glowed in power and money. He also “appeared” to be “a creative”, like me, too.

As my relationship with this individual developed, what I found underneath the veil was far from what the exterior portrayed. He was in an “open marriage”; his life was spiraling out of control. He was also hiring broken-down-trodden individuals to do the heavy lifting inside his business because he could pay them less and work them to death. And in all he did in life, he placed appearances far higher on his list than true happiness and meaning despite all of his soul searching trips to meet spiritual gurus.

While he thought he was mentoring me, it was I who was mentoring him.

Through my mentorship, this individual came to to emotionally understand that true love and intimacy was more important to him than sex with multiple women. He also came to experience that a creative career and business was far more valuable to him than a past-its-sell-date sweat shop that gushed cash. However, I was never given any credit for my work. The profound changes that I witnessed in him, during our professional relationship, were not rewarded with generosity for his newly found flow of heart centered creativity; which my mentorship reinvigorated the hunger within him to have. It certainly also did not make him donate funds to The IAE, or even thank me. Instead he took it freely from me as if it had no intrinsic value or significant economic worth.

And if I had told him upfront the price tag to help him was a donation of $100,000 to my school, he would have laughed and walked away. Why would he pay when all of us artists continue to give our gifts away for free to those who don’t have the skills, but have the resources to pay for what we have to deliver?

Today this individual is happily, for the first time, married to one woman. And he sold his company too and is now working on something truly meaningful to him and which is helping him to build his creative capacity.

Artists can truly help restore the inner lives of the majority not to mention by doing so stop the Penn State’s, Bernie Madoff’s and Enron’s from ever happening. But it is going to require finding the minority of the majority- those financially able and brave enough to invest and act- to step up and give those of us with these gifts a chance to fully integrate our pure heart centered creativity into their world.

Please Lord hear my prayer. I am sure this is the work you put all of us artists on this earth to do. And, finally, I believe our time has come to do your work on your beloved earth. The world is awakening to the real need for promised words and actions to match. Intellectual understanding is not from where we are compelled to act. This is why I dutifully created The IAE- to help artists help others make progress on earth for you.

Please send me the minority who is willing to invest and act. Lord hear my prayer.

Born Like an Artist, Evolve Like an Artist, Bloom Like an Artist

Lisa Canning — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 02:39:06 +0000

While it is easy to look at this cartoon strip created by Norwegian artist, Ida Eva Margrethe Neverdahl, and see it for its “face” value, I would encourage you to look deeper. Ida shares a great visual story, in my opinion, about how we discover our “emotional” elephant and learn to ride it. ( For more explicate training instructions read How to train your elephant to increase whole brain thinking.)

You see, we all have an elephant inside of us. And none of us has an easy time, at first, getting on its back- as this cartoon strip illustrates. But when you learn how to, your life will magically begin to flow. And you too will be able to “ride your artwave and show off its fun“ quite easily, successfully and profitably.

Growing Starbucks: Extending Brand Uniqueness or Diluting It?

Lisa Canning — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 13:07:18 +0000

At what point, if any, does extending brand uniqueness create a tipping point that then threatens the very foundation of the brand itself? Lately I have been asking myself this very question about the Starbucks brand.

Starbucks 1st store location in Seattle's Pike Place Market, 1971

As we all know, back in the 90′s Howard Schultz transformed the second most consumed drink after water, and the second most traded commodity after crude oil, coffee, into a unique retail destination for us all between work and home.

Putting people before products, Schultz used intuition more than “brand strategy” in those early days to develop Starbucks into the social place outside of work or home most of us did not even realize how much we needed. Schultz’s vision and intuition allowed Starbucks to leverage a low cost commodity, coffee, and transform it into a “$4.00-human-interactive-experiencial-brand.”

And now with Howard Schultz’s recent return to Starbucks as CEO, after a series of setbacks and financial downturns after his departure, the question is can he add more value to the bottom line while retaining the “human soul”- the uniqueness- he built into the Starbucks brand? Or is he reaching for the tipping point leading to the erosion of it?

According to Merriam-Webster something that is unique is defined as:

1. Being the only one.
2. Being without a like or equal.
3. Distinctively characteristic: peculiar.
4. Unusual.

There is no doubt Starbucks has managed to create a unique retail store environment with their friendly customer oriented staff, great music, comfy chairs and heartfelt emotional connective messaging.

And they have quite successfully been able to extend the feeling you get from their brand outside their stores too spending far less on advertising than other large retailers and consumer products companies to achieve tremendous brand loyalty.

Check out these 2006 comparative stats of what other companies spent on advertising for their brand.

Microsoft – more than 20 percent of their annual revenue or $11.5 billion
Coca-Cola – more than $2.5 billion
Yahoo – more than 20 percent of their annual revenue or $1.3 billion
eBay – 14 percent to 15 percent of its revenue – which was $871 million, much of that to advertise on Google
Google – In the millions rather than billions of dollars – with $188 million
Starbucks – $95 million

In 2006, Starbucks spent just $95 million on advertising with 7.8 billion in sales demonstrating their amazing strength as an “experiential brand”.

But is it possible to continue to expand the human experience of this brand while Starbucks’ transition into what Schultz hopes will be the first company to excel as both a retailer and a purveyor—in supermarkets and other mass-market channels—of consumer packaged goods?

According to Schultz, “This is a unique inflection point for Starbucks; I think we’ve identified a very big opportunity to do something that really has not been done before. And that is the following: there are many, many companies, domestically and around the world, that have built a domestic national footprint around retail stores, just like Starbucks—the Gap, Costco, Wal-Mart, Coach, Zara. And there are many consumer-packaged-goods companies—Pepsi, Coke, Kellogg’s, Campbell’s. There hasn’t been one company I can identify that has been able to build complementary channels of distribution by integrating the retail footprint and the ubiquitous channels of distribution—in our case, grocery stores and drug stores.

So the model is, Starbucks can seed and introduce new products and new brands inside our stores. We introduced VIA instant coffee in our stores. Instant coffee is a $24 billion global category that has not had any innovation in over 50 years. And no growth. If we took VIA and we put it into grocery stores and it sat on a shelf, it would have died. But we can integrate VIA into the emotional connection we have with our customers in our stores. We did that for six to eight months and succeeded well beyond expectations in our stores. And as a result of that, we had a very easy time convincing the trade, because they wanted it so badly.”

And while it’s true Starbucks has tallied up five years of positive earnings and five years of positive free cash flow, again, in part, under Schultz’s leadership, Starbucks stock has only just recently seen a rise above mid 2006 values.

However, food stocks should be on the rise. It makes sense that with unemployment up, the housing market down, and the world economy on shaky ground that food-makers would deliver stable sales.

So the question is can Starbucks continue to introduce produces like VIA into their stores and translate the uniqueness of their brand through them into distribution channels? Will their customers buy into all the products they introduce in their retail environment, bond with them, and then readily buy them from their local grocery store or drug store?

I don’t know about you, but I for one was completely turned off by VIA’s introduction at Starbucks. My sense of embracing the serenity of my “home away from work or home” felt threatened by the through I was being encouraged to take a little packet of dried coffee home as a substitute for the experience of being in their retail environment. I have always bought into Starbucks being an ” escape,” a destination, a home away from home. To add insult to injury, I was told if I liked their dried coffee, which I also perceived as cheapening the brand, I did not even have to come back into the store- I could buy it elsewhere. It almost felt like an invitation to never come back- I felt like I was losing a friend.

Howard Schultz in his 2011 book Onward: How Starbucks Fought for Its Life without Losing Its Soul specifically talks about his mission in a way that’s very different from most CEOs. “Everything we’ve tried to do,” he writes, “is steeped in humanity.” I certainly find Schultz’s new goal as being very problematic for the brand.

Purveyors use distribution channels and have retailers who connect with end users for a reason- because retails act differently than purveyors. I have witnessed this first hand within the music industry. The clarinet company I represent, Buffet Crampon, increasingly in the 90′s adopted some of my best practices working with customers. Increasingly they acted more like a retailer than a distributor, or the purveyor they are, by increasing the attention they paid towards potential end users. They threw private parties and gave potential customers the opportunity, before retailers, to see and experience new products.

In the end, it pissed off retailers who felt side stepped and while left uninformed were expected to close the sale with the majority of the customers anyways. I am not sure how much it really did to help them grow their brand then but they have abandoned most of those practices now. While I realize, Starbucks first and foremost is recognized as an extremely well established retailer- a significant difference from being a purveyor dabbling in retail, placing people over products simultaneously in both distribution channels and retail environments will be challenging. Distributors exist to move product and retailers exist to sell those products to people. The motivation of each is different and as a result using the same messaging for both won’t be easy to effectively manage.

While I think Schultz’s idea is very interesting to try and be the first company to excel at both, how will Starbucks lead me or anyone else to rediscovering why we’re best friends with this as their end game strategy in their retail environment?

I don’t know about you, but I spend time with a best friend. I get to know them. I also frequently see them in the same places and I don’t just spend money on them. While distributors and Schultz alike may hope Starbucks can convincingly sell us many products at the local grocery from an experience or two in their retail environment, it is yet to be seen how well they can translate the uniqueness of their brand into repetitive buying decisions in locations outside their own doors.

Ode to Dr Suess: Ding-Dong, Ring-Ring

Lisa Canning — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 13:00:51 +0000

Well, its that time again…….

I’m dusting off ornaments,

untangling a ball full of metal fishhook hangers from each other

and uncurling ribbons on those (damn) wreath bows.

I think it might be time to go shopping.

Ode to Dr Suess: Ding-Dong, Ring-Ring

Ding- dong, Ring- ring

all the bells are RING-ING!!

People shuffling,

Cash registers opening,

Boy! all those entrepreneurs are “hoping”…

All those folks out there, being ”customers”,

AND BUYING stuff up!

and UP!

AND UP!!

They shop and don’t stop

SAY WHAT?

JUST WHAT??

just what could THEY POSSIBLY BE THINKING???

Inside every customer

is a mind that is

Thinking ….

and THINKING!

AND THINKING!!!

THINKING To fill IT’S own voids,

and center it’s Being.

~~~

Customers buy to be happy, and satisfy

their worth.

AND customers especially treasure artists, for their gifts,

BLESSED at birth.

we love, we laugh, we cry,

WE UNWIND……!!!

We harden, we age, we narrow,

WE WHY????

Ding-Dong, Ring-Ring, Customers nearing!

Take niche to find thrive, hurry up, there’s still time!

GO AHEAD, follow the signs to give your customer a ride–

On the ARTWAVE you know, well.

YOU KNOW? The one YOU CAN RIDE!!

You ride to find niche for your customers, who will buy!!!

And BUY!!

AND BUY!!!!

What they pay for is YOU, to teach them to GLIDE.

To glide on the ride that, YOU KNOW how to ride.

Perfectly.

The one that produces Your OWN version of THRIVE.

We RIDE. We thrive. THEY Ride. They Glide

We all simply enjoy

as we all simply ride.

But do you remember the day, YOUR art called your name????????

It TICKLED your funny bone, calling to YOU, Outloud AND BY NAME!!

Go Dancer and Painter

Go CartoonIST and VisionIST.

Go off in your sleigh with A Plan,

BECOME AN Artistic missionist!!

Your future, it awaits you, its only begun.

Your art wave will take you, anywhere,

quite far and far flung!!

..as long as you ride it, AND SHOW OFF ITS FUN!

To Yonder and Listen and Dreamer and Great VisionISTS;

your patrons, are waiting for you..remember to visit us!

Ding-dong, Ring-ring, my poem is nearly done.

Take the arts into the future, and find life Ohhhh SOOOOoooooo MUCH richer,

Merry Christmas, Dr. Seuss; you’re a missionIST and my hero

from a patron, gliding,

and sent with love.

Wishing all of you patrons and bloggers a

wonderful holiday season!

Lisa Canning

Re-Imagining the Orchestra

David Cutler — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 11:00:21 +0000

You may be aware that the New World Symphony is America’s leading training orchestra, boasting top rate talent. And you may have heard about their breathtaking new hall in Miami Beach. But did you know that members of this group are daring to re-imagine the business model of orchestras from the bottom up?

The fact that many American orchestras struggle to survive is no secret. In the past few years, top-tier ensembles in Philadelphia, Syracuse, Honolulu, Detroit, Louisville, Dallas, and New Mexico have cancelled concerts, issued pay cuts, declared bankruptcy, or closed their doors. Reversing this trend will likely require more than savvier social media use, fundraising efforts, or other one-dimensional potions.

I recently completed a two-day residency with the NWS focused around this very problem. Below is a summary of our journey.

PROCESS

As a starting point, we used the following scenario. The year is 2020, and almost every major full-time American symphony orchestra has since declared bankruptcy and closed its doors. (Obviously nobody desires this outcome, but imposing these “conditions” forced fellows to think creatively and challenge status quo.)

Confronted by that hypothetical, a group of NWS alum decides to found a new ensemble, Orchestra Future. For this organization, two priorities are non-negotiable:

We must produce outstanding art (an area where Orchestras Past excelled)
We must create a sustainable business model (an area where Orchestras Past were not ultimately able to succeed in the 21^st Century)

Beyond these two points, anything and everything was on the table. How might this new, alternate Orchestra Future look?

Magical solutions did not instantly appear. As with any meaningful strategic planning, the process benefited from thoughtful discussion and collective wisdom. Participants began by dissecting Orchestras Past (in other words, the 2011 paradigm), honing in specifically on three large-scale areas they deemed essential: 1) Event Design, 2) Institutional Culture, and 3) Relevance.

After considering both positive and negative aspects of Orchestras Past, attention turned to specific, actionable solutions for Orchestra Future. And even though our meeting time was limited, some fascinating conclusions were drawn.

MISSION

Our thought leaders turned first to mission. They decided that the purpose of Orchestra Future will be to:

Serve and celebrate local community
Function as an arts and innovation “fountain”

These essential priorities would impact every major decision, from programming and musician responsibilities to activities pursued and marketing tactics.

HIRING PRACTICES

With Orchestras Past, outstanding performance was the sole or primary criteria when auditioning new members.

Applicants will only be considered by Orchestra Future when they clearly bring a valuable secondary asset with them. That might mean being an extraordinary educator, great public speaker, good schmoozer, effective fundraiser, dynamic marketing visionary, freakish master of multiple artistic talents, etc. In other words, every employee must clearly demonstrate his/her value towards achieving both non-negotiable priorities (great art and sustainable business model).

CORE PERFORMANCE ACTIVITIES

Orchestras Past engaged in two primary types of performance activities. The ratio of time devoted and perceived importance between these areas was estimated at around 85/15.

Formal concerts-85%. “Masterworks,” “Pops,” or some other program variation. This area was the meat and potatoes for every full-time musician of Orchestras Past.
Engagement-15%. Educational and community outreach events. For members of Orchestras Past, involvement here was often optional.

Both of these activity categories continue to play a role in Orchestra Future. But their relative importance is reallocated to 50/50. And though all musicians will be required to participate on both sides of the equation, not all divide their time equally. Some are more focused on one side or the other, falling somewhere on the spectrum between 85/15 and 15/85.

EVENT DESIGN

In addition to outstanding performance (always important), concerts by Orchestras Past were characterized by several features. A partial list of conventions includes:

Programming. Overture-concerto-symphony model. Multi-movement works always played in their entirety. Music by dead, white, European composers comprised 95+% of programs.
Instrumentation. Only three kinds of instrumentations were permitted: full orchestra, orchestra with soloist(s), solo encore.
Visual stimulation. Typically minimal.
Verbal communication with audience. Nothing, or offered solely by the conductor.

While Orchestras Past delivered incredible art through these formats, Orchestra Future will vastly expand the palate of experiences offered. The NWS group imagined a number of initiatives that, at times, challenged each of these conventions. In particular, they considered ways that event design could directly reflect their mission priorities of local community and arts/innovation fountain.

MUSICIAN RESPONSIBILITY

In Orchestras Past, musicians had the following responsibilities:

Performance. First and foremost, show up on time for rehearsals/performances, be prepared, and follow strictly regulated etiquette guidelines (85-100% of job).
Engagement. At a distant second, participate in educational and engagement events. Not always required (0-15%).
Service. Some musicians had roles on various committees (0-5%).

In Orchestra Future, not only will the proportion of energy dedicated to each of these categories change, but musicians have additional responsibilities including:

Secondary skill. Every performer is involved with a secondary area where they have aptitude, interest, and ability to help the organization succeed.
Marketing. All stakeholders play an active role in marketing and advocacy.

INSTITUTIONAL CULTURE

Sadly, Orchestras Past had a reputation for being resistant to change and sometimes unhappy organizations. Whether true or not, an infamous study by Harvard researcher Richard Hackman found that orchestral musicians ranked among the lowest in terms of overall job satisfaction compared to other professions, just under federal prison guards.

Though the NWS fellows did not have enough time to outline a comprehensive new cultural positioning statement, they did offer some reflections. Orchestra Future must be a place where creativity, innovation, and experimentation are celebrated at every level. Players should be actively involved with operations, vision, and major decisions of the ensemble. Ideas will be evaluated on the merit of the proposal rather than the rank of its originator. A respectful and supportive environment is key, with a prohibition placed on unconstructive complaining and negative attitudes. If orchestras are truly to serve communities, they must begin with a healthy, vibrant internal culture.

—-

Of course, we’re not yet in the year 2020, and thankfully all of the major American orchestras have not closed their doors. There is a lot these organizations can do now to avoid the heart-breaking scenario that NWS discussed. While specific solutions may vary, one thing is certain: Major innovation is surely a requisite ingredient (true for any sector in our complicated and quickly evolving world). If different results are desired, the model must change.

Thank you to the New World Symphony for being brave enough to tackle this crucial topic. It’s only a starting point—talk won’t save the industry, only action. But this conversation marked an important step, and will hopefully serve as inspiration and a catalyst for meaningful change.

Long live the orchestra! Here’s to sustainable models that allow this culturally rich institution to produce outstanding art for many, many years to come!

Related articles:

: NWS video projections during concert

What does it mean to be a servant leader?

Lisa Canning — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 14:29:25 +0000

In a world where interruption, abruptness and “me first” rules, is it really any wonder we are economically struggling? How can we deepen trust and increase listening to build cohesive teams in this kind of disconnected environment?

2nd shift at work in my father's foundry, Alpha-Cast.

Long ago I watched my father purchase a bankrupt diesel engine foundry business and transform it into a roaring success through his practice of servant leadership.

My father, Theodore Argiris, a Harvard graduate, and before entering the foundry business a prominent criminal attorney in Chicago, pictured here with his hard hat on in the lunchroom with some of his employees. Many days after school, when I would stop by the foundry, I would find him in the lunchroom. We would have something to drink together and I would participate in conversations with him and his employees. I was able to observe how my dad involved them in key decision making and built shared understanding, empathy and as a result, trusted peer relationships with them.

Servant leadership is a philosophy and practice of leadership, coined and defined by Robert K. Greenleaf. Servant-leaders are often seen as humble stewards of their organization’s resources: human, financial and physical.

As a young woman, I learned a great deal watching how my father built relationships with his employees through developing shared language and asking for their input with key decision making.

Larry C. Spears, who has served as President and CEO of the Robert K. Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership since 1990, has extracted a set of 10 characteristics that are central to the development of a servant leader:

Listening: Traditionally, and also in servant leadership, managers are required to have communication skills as well as the competence to make decisions. A servant leader has the motivation to listen actively to subordinates and support them in decision identification. The servant leader particularly needs to pay attention to what remains unspoken in the management setting. This means relying on his inner voice in order to find out what the body, mind and spirit are communicating.

Empathy: A servant leader attempts to understand and empathize with others. Workers may be considered not only as employees, but also as people who need respect and appreciation for their personal development. As a result, leadership is seen as a special type of human work, which ultimately generates a competitive advantage.

Healing: A great strength of a Servant Leader is the ability for healing one’s self and others. A servant leader tries to help people solve their problems and conflicts in relationships, because he wants to encourage and support the personal development of each individual.This leads to the formation of a business culture, in which the working environment is dynamic, fun and free of the fear of failure.

Awareness: A servant leader needs to gain general awareness and especially self-awareness. He has the ability to view situations from a more integrated, holistic position. As a result, he gets a better understanding about ethics and values.

Persuasion: A Servant Leader does not take advantage of her power and status by coercing compliance; she rather tries to convince those she manages. This element distinguishes servant leadership most clearly from traditional, authoritarian models and can be traced back to the religious views of Robert Greenleaf.

Conceptualization: A servant leader thinks beyond day-to-day realities. That means he has the ability to see beyond the limits of the operating business and also focuses on long term operating goals. A Leader constructs a personal vision that only he can develop by reflecting on the meaning of life. As a result, he derives specific goals and implementation strategies.

Foresight: Foresight is the ability to foresee the likely outcome of a situation. It enables the servant leader to learn about the past and to achieve a better understanding about the current reality. It also enables the servant leader to identify consequences about the future. This characteristic is closely related to conceptualization.

Stewardship: CEOs, staffs and trustees have the task to hold their institution in trust for the greater good of society. In conclusion, servant leadership is seen as an obligation to help and serve others. Openness and persuasion are more important than control.

Commitment to the growth of people: A servant leader is convinced that people have an intrinsic value beyond their contributions as workers. Therefore, she should nurture the personal, professional and spiritual growth of employees. For example, she spends money for the personal and professional development of the people who make up her organization. The servant leader will also encourage the ideas of everyone and involve workers in decision making.

Building community: A servant leader identifies means to build a strong community within his organization and wants to develop a true community among businesses and institutions.
At the foundry, employee's had a great "can do" attitude because they felt like a cohesive community that each individually was understood. Communication flowed, problems were solved and progress was made.

Global Entrepreneurship Week November 14-20, 2011

Lisa Canning — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 13:11:23 +0000

Unleash your ideas with us this week for Global Entrepreneurship Week! Come on Thur Nov 17th to our idea pitch event called Create. Innovate. Repeat. here in Chicago. There is still room for 2 more presenters if you want to sign up!

Learn more about Global Entrepreneurship 2011.

Richard Branson talks about Global Entrepreneurship Week and why he thinks entrepreneurs really can change the world.

U.S. Small Business and Entrepreneurship Conference, January 12-15 New Orleans, LA

Lisa Canning — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 20:09:57 +0000

In 2012 The United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship (USASBE) will be held from January 12-15th in New Orleans, LA. My colleague from University of Illinois, Joyce Thomas and myself will be attending to present material from a paper we wrote, with another Univ of IL colleague, Deana McDonough, about The IAE and our learning cloud model. I am excited to be presenting my first paper about The IAE at this conference. This will be the 3rd time I have attended USASBE. I think it’s a valuable resource and a great networking opportunity. I hope you will consider attending. You can register here.

About USASBE

USASBE is the largest independent, professional, academic organization in the world dedicated to advancing the discipline of entrepreneurship. With over 1000 members from universities and colleges, for-profit businesses, nonprofit organizations, and the public sector, USASBE is a diverse mix of professionals that share a common commitment to fostering entrepreneurial attitudes and behaviors.

USASBE is built around four pillars that guide the ongoing development of our organization. The pillars include:

entrepreneurship education
entrepreneurship research
entrepreneurship outreach and
public policy

By fostering advances in each of these areas, we support the development of entrepreneurship educators who in turn will create next generation of entrepreneurs.

The roots of USASBE go back over fifty years to the founding of the International Council for Small Business (ICSB) in 1957. The ICSB was founded in the United States as a comprehensive organization of outstanding researchers, scholars, teachers, administrators, and public policy makers interested in entrepreneurship and small business. As the organization grew, members decided to form national affiliates, and the U. S. Affiliate of the ICSB was established in 1981. In 1985, the name was changed to the United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship (USASBE). Today, USASBE is an independent academic organization with its own unique mission, while also retaining its affiliation with ICSB.

USASBE is a community of scholars, entrepreneurship program and center directors, government officials, directors of entrepreneurship support organizations and others. It is a community that works to enhance our understanding of the phenomenon of entrepreneurship and to identify best practices in how to teach entrepreneurial principles and facilitate the creation and growth of new for-profit and social ventures. Ours is a culture of exploring, experimenting, innovating, sharing, challenging and giving.

As leaders in the emerging discipline of entrepreneurship, our members are making an impact on how we think about, conduct research on, design public policy around, and interact with entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial ventures. They are extending the field of knowledge and shaping the discipline to reflect the opportunities and demands of the 21st Century.

Creative Productivity & The Creative Theorists- Part 3, Csíkszentmihályi

Lisa Canning — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 16:19:46 +0000

How can imagination become creative productivity? How can artists fuse the work of creative theorists to their gifts to help others to innovate? So far both Basadur’s Creative Problem Solving Profile and deBono’s Six Thinking Hat Theory have provided a structure that is relatively easy to understand, adapt and implement. But with our next creative theorist, Mihaly Csíkszentmihályi, quickly that clarity disappears into the murky world of “flow”.

Mihaly Csíkszentmihályi (pronounced “chick-sent-me-high-ee”) is a Hungarian psychology professor, who emigrated to the United States at the age of 22. Now at Claremont Graduate University, Dr. Csíkszentmihályi is a distinguished professor of psychology and management in the school of organizational and behavioral sciences. He is also the Founding Co-Director of the Quality of Life Research Center. The QLRC is a non-profit research institute that studies “positive psychology”; that is, human strengths such as optimism, creativity, intrinsic motivation, and responsibility.” Prior to his work at Claremont, Mihaly, was the head of the department of psychology at the University of Chicago and of the department of sociology and anthropology at Lake Forest College.

Flow

Mihaly is known for his work in the study of happiness and creativity, and in particular for his years of research and writing on the ideas around life’s “flow.” He is the author of a number of books on the topic including:

Having devoted 30 years of research to how creative people live and work, in his seminal work, Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, Csíkszentmihályi outlines his theory that people need to be happy and be in a state of flow— a state of concentration or complete absorption with the activity at hand and the situation. It is a state in which people are so involved in an activity that nothing else seems to matter (Csíkszentmihályi,1990). The idea of flow is identical to the feeling of being in the zone or in the groove. The flow state is an optimal state of intrinsic motivation, where the person is fully immersed in what he or she is doing. In an interview with Wired magazine, Csíkszentmihályi described flow as “being completely involved in an activity for its own sake. The ego falls away. Time flies. Every action, movement, and thought follows inevitably from the previous one, like playing jazz. Your whole being is involved, and you’re using your skills to the utmost.”

Csikszentmihalyi saw optimal activities in the "flow" channel moving outward as skills are gained. In short, flow can be described as a state where attention, motivation, and the situation meet, resulting in a kind of productive harmony or feedback.

To achieve a flow state, a balance must be struck between the challenge of the task and the skill of the performer. If the task is too easy or too difficult, flow cannot occur. Both skill level and challenge level must be matched and high; if skill and challenge are low and matched, then apathy results. The flow state also implies a kind of focused attention, and indeed, it has been noted that mindfulness, meditation, yoga, the Alexander Technique, and martial arts seem to improve a person’s capacity for flow.

Why is flow essential to creative productivity?

“Creativity is often defined as a parallel construct to intelligence, but it differs from intelligence in that it is not restricted to cognitive or intellectual functioning or behavior. Instead, it is concerned with a complex mix of motivational conditions, personality factors, environmental conditions, chance factors, and even products.” (Feldhusen and Goh, 1995) The concepts of Flow, fit nicely into this construct.

In his book Flow Csíkszentmihályi lists a number of facts (not all of which have to be present) to create an experience of flow.

1. Clear goals (expectations and rules are discernible and goals are attainable and align appropriately with one’s skill set and abilities).

2. Concentrating and focusing, a high degree of concentration on a limited field of attention (a person engaged in the activity will have the opportunity to focus and to delve deeply into it).

3. A loss of the feeling of self-consciousness, the merging of action and awareness.

4. Distorted sense of time, one’s subjective experience of time is altered.

5. Direct and immediate feedback (successes and failures in the course of the activity are apparent, so that behavior can be adjusted as needed).

6. Balance between ability level and challenge (the activity is neither too easy nor too difficult).

7. A sense of personal control over the situation or activity.

8. The activity is intrinsically rewarding, so there is an effortlessness of action.

9. People become absorbed in their activity, and focus of awareness is narrowed down to the activity itself, action awareness merging.

What personality traits do those posses who frequently achieve creative “flow”?

According to Csíkszentmihályi, creative personalities are different from others, because of their complexity. Creative individuals show tendencies of thought and action that in most people are segregated. They contain contradictory extremes; instead of being an “individual,” each of them is a “multitude.”

Here are 10 paradoxical traits Csíkszentmihályi believes are often present in creative people.

1. Creative people have a great deal of physical energy, but they’re also often quiet and at rest.

They work long hours, with great concentration, while projecting an aura of freshness and enthusiasm. Yet it is surprising how often individuals who in their seventies and eighties exude energy and health remember childhoods plagued by illness. It seems that their energy is internally generated, due more to their focused minds than superior genetics. This does not mean that creative people are hyperactive, always “on.” In fact, they rest often and sleep a lot. The important thing is that they control their energy; it’s not ruled by the calendar, the clock, an external schedule. When necessary, they can focus it like a laser beam; when not, creative types immediately recharge their batteries. They consider the rhythm of activity followed by idleness or reflection very important for the success of their work. This is not a bio-rhythm inherited with their genes; it was learned by trial and error as a strategy for achieving their goals.

2. Creative people tend to be smart yet naive at the same time.

How smart they actually are is open to question. It is probably true that what psychologists call the “g factor,” meaning a core of general intelligence, is high among people who make important creative contributions.The earliest longitudinal study of superior mental abilities, initiated at Stanford University by the psychologist Lewis Terman in 1921, shows rather conclusively that children with very high IQs do well in life, but after a certain point IQ does not seem to be correlated any longer with superior performance in real life. Later studies suggest that the cutoff point is around 120; it might be difficult to do creative work with a lower IQ, but an IQ beyond 120 does not necessarily imply higher creativity.Furthermore, people who bring about an acceptable novelty in a domain seem able to use well two opposite ways of thinking: the convergent and the divergent. Convergent thinking is measured by IQ tests, and it involves solving well-defined, rational problems that have one correct answer. Divergent thinking leads to no agreed-upon solution. It involves fluency, or the ability to generate a great quantity of ideas; flexibility, or the ability to switch from one perspective to another; and originality in picking unusual associations of ideas. These are the dimensions of thinking that most creativity tests measure and that most workshops try to enhance.

Another way of expressing this dialectic is the contrasting poles of wisdom and childishness. As Howard Gardner remarked in his study of the major creative geniuses of this century, a certain immaturity, both emotional and mental, can go hand in hand with deepest insights. Mozart comes immediately to mind.

3. Creative people combine playfulness and discipline, or responsibility and irresponsibility.

Creative people combine playfulness and discipline, or responsibility and irresponsibility. There is no question that a playfully light attitude is typical of creative individuals. But this playfulness doesn’t go very far without its antithesis, a quality of doggedness, endurance, perseverance. Nina Holton, whose playfully claims wild germs of ideas are the genesis of her sculpture, is very firm about the importance of hard work: “Tell anybody you’re a sculptor and they’ll say, ‘Oh, how exciting, how wonderful.’ And I tend to say, ‘What’s so wonderful?’ It’s like being a mason, or a carpenter, half the time. But they don’t wish to hear that because they really only imagine the first part, the exciting part.

4. Creative people alternate between imagination and fantasy, and a rooted sense of reality.

Creative people alternate between imagination and fantasy, and a rooted sense of reality. Great art and great science involve a leap of imagination into a world that is different from the present. The rest of society often views these new ideas as fantasies without relevance to current reality. And they are right. But the whole point of art and science is to go beyond what we now consider real and create a new reality. At the same time, this “escape” is not into a never-never land. What makes a novel idea creative is that once we see it, sooner or later we recognize that, strange as it is, it is true. Most of us assume that artists—musicians, writers, poets, painters—are strong on the fantasy side, whereas scientists, politicians, and businesspeople are realists. This may be true in terms of day-to-day routine activities. But when a person begins to work creatively, all bets are off.

5. Creative people trend to be both extroverted and introverted.

Creative people tend to be both extroverted and introverted. We’re usually one or the other, either preferring to be in the thick of crowds or sitting on the sidelines and observing the passing show. In fact, in psychological research, extroversion and introversion are considered the most stable personality traits that differentiate people from each other and that can be reliably measured. Creative individuals, on the other hand, seem to exhibit both traits simultaneously.

6. Creative people are humble and proud at the same time.

Creative people are humble and proud at the same time. It is remarkable to meet a famous person who you expect to be arrogant or supercilious, only to encounter self-deprecation and shyness instead. Yet there are good reasons why this should be so. These individuals are well aware that they stand, in Newton’s words, “on the shoulders of giants.” Their respect for the area in which they work makes them aware of the long line of previous contributions to it, putting their own in perspective. They’re also aware of the role that luck played in their own achievements. And they’re usually so focused on future projects and current challenges that past accomplishments, no matter how outstanding, are no longer very interesting to them. At the same time, they know that in comparison with others, they have accomplished a great deal. And this knowledge provides a sense of security, even pride.

7. Creative people, to an extent, escape rigid gender role stereotyping.

Creative people, to an extent, escape rigid gender role stereotyping. When tests of masculinity/femininity are given to young people, over and over one finds that creative and talented girls are more dominant and tough than other girls, and creative boys are more sensitive and less aggressive than their male peers.This tendency toward androgyny is sometimes understood in purely sexual terms, and therefore it gets confused with homosexuality. But psychological androgyny is a much wider concept referring to a person’s ability to be at the same time aggressive and nurturing, sensitive and rigid, dominant and submissive, regardless of gender. Creative individuals are more likely to have not only the strengths of their own gender but those of the other one, too.

8. Creative people are both rebellious and conservative.

Creative people are both rebellious and conservative. It is impossible to be creative without having first internalized an area of culture. So it’s difficult to see how a person can be creative without being both traditional and conservative and at the same time rebellious and iconoclastic. Being only traditional leaves an area unchanged; constantly taking chances without regard to what has been valued in the past rarely leads to novelty that is accepted as an improvement. The artist Eva Zeisel, who says that the folk tradition in which she works is “her home,” nevertheless produces ceramics that were recognized by the Museum of Modern Art as masterpieces of contemporary design. This is what she says about innovation for its own sake:”This idea to create something is not my aim. To be different is a negative motive, and no creative thought or created thing grows out of a negative impulse. A negative impulse is always frustrating. And to be different means ‘not like this’ and ‘not like that.’ And the ‘not like’—that’s why postmodernism, with the prefix of ‘post,’ couldn’t work. No negative impulse can work, can produce any happy creation. Only a positive one.”

But the willingness to take risks, to break with the safety of tradition, is also necessary. The economist George Stigler is very emphatic in this regard: “I’d say one of the most common failures of able people is a lack of nerve. They’ll play safe games. In innovation, you have to play a less safe game, if it’s going to be interesting. It’s not predictable that it’ll go well.”

9. Most creative people are very passionate about their work, yet they can be extremely objective about it as well.

Most creative people are very passionate about their work, yet they can be extremely objective about it as well. Without the passion, we soon lose interest in a difficult task. Yet without being objective about it, our work is not very good and lacks credibility.

10. Creative people’s openness and sensitivity often exposes them to suffering and pain, yet also to a great deal of enjoyment.

Creative people’s openness and sensitivity often exposes them to suffering and pain, yet also to a great deal of enjoyment. Most would agree with Rabinow’s words: “Inventors have a low threshold of pain. Things bother them.” A badly designed machine causes pain to an inventive engineer, just as the creative writer is hurt when reading bad prose.Being alone at the forefront of a discipline also leaves you exposed and vulnerable. Eminence invites criticism and often vicious attacks. When an artist has invested years in making a sculpture, or a scientist in developing a theory, it is devastating if nobody cares.Deep interest and involvement in obscure subjects often goes unrewarded, or even brings on ridicule. Divergent thinking is often perceived as deviant by the majority, and so the creative person may feel isolated and misunderstood. Perhaps the most difficult thing for creative individuals to bear is the sense of loss and emptiness they experience when, for some reason, they cannot work. This is especially painful when a person feels his or her creativity drying out.Yet when a person is working in the area of his of her expertise, worries and cares fall away, replaced by a sense of bliss. Perhaps the most important quality, the one that is most consistently present in all creative individuals, is the ability to enjoy the process of creation for its own sake. Without this trait, poets would give up striving for perfection and would write commercial jingles, economists would work for banks where they would earn at least twice as much as they do at universities, and physicists would stop doing basic research and join industrial laboratories where the conditions are better and the expectations more predictable.

Csíkszentmihályi’s theory of Flow, and how it is created, certainly builds a clear case for artists to use his or her artistry- in its pure form- to illustrate and teach others Csíkszentmihályi concepts of flow. Csíkszentmihályi’s theoretical constructs provides the necessary framework to communicate how the arts can facilitate creating an environment for creative productivity and innovation to emerge.

More Foundations Using Investment Assets to Achieve Their Missions

Lisa Canning — Sun, 30 Oct 2011 12:30:58 +0000

This is pretty interesting news for all of you out there with missions that have no funding sources- yet. All we need to do now is find out which foundations have missions clearly inline with our own…

What does the term Mission Investing mean? A growing group of foundations are increasingly thinking about their organizations as stewards of resources that can be applied to address some of the most challenging problems of their unique missions and program areas. The field of mission investing (MI) is making significant strides. Mission investing is another way for foundations to effect transformational change by using their long-term patient capital to invest in under-served markets.

“More Foundations Use Investment Assets to Achieve Their Missions.” Foundation Center Press Release 10/26/11.

The number of community and private foundations using their investment portfolios to help achieve a social benefit is growing, a new report from the Foundation Center finds.

According to Key Facts on Mission Investing (see link below, 4 page PDF), which benchmarks for the first time foundations’ engagement with mission-related investment, one in seven of the foundations surveyed for the report are directing their assets to market-rate mission-related investments or below-market-rate program-related investments (PRIs). The report also finds that more than half the foundations making mission-related investments started doing so within the past five years, while 28 percent started to do so within the past two years.

By investing endowment funds with an eye to advancing their missions, these grantmakers — which together hold some 20 percent of all U.S. foundation assets — are extending the public benefit of their financial resources, the report argues. While all foundations are allowed by law to make PRIs, which generally yield below-market-rate returns and count toward a foundation’s charitable distribution requirement, market-rate investments that support a foundation’s programmatic goals do not count toward the distribution requirement.

In 2010, private foundations in the U.S. awarded approximately $46 billion in grants, while their assets totaled more than $600 billion. “Foundations are striving for greater impact,” said Steven Lawrence, the Foundation Center’s director of research and principal author of the report. “Mission investing puts foundation asset dollars to work in ways that have the potential to go far beyond the social impact of their grantmaking dollars.”

Click Here to Read a 2011 Keyfacts Report on Mission Investing

Too Elitist or Not Enough?

David Cutler — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 12:00:10 +0000

I spend a good deal of time dreaming up bold and unconventional success solutions for the arts. While these proposals typically receive serious consideration from some corners, there are others who emotionally shoot them down immediately without any rational thought whatsoever. It seems the closer someone is to a position, the more threatening a fresh alternative can feel. Even if the current model is clearly not working.

All too aware of this human tendency, I pride myself on considering the merits of any and every proposal. Even if my gut reaction is “NO!” Especially when that’s the case.

And so it was last week, while witnessing a keynote presentation by Brittish novelist and music critic Norman Lebrecht at the Dutch Classical Music Meeting. Author of Who Killed Classical Music? Lebrecht is renowned for thoughtful but provocative, controversial viewpoints.

In a talk entitled Reframing the Classical Music Experience, Lebrecht declared that one word that has been taboo for decades in the classical music world. We shy away from it at all costs. But as organizations look for new solutions that enable vibrancy and sustainability, we no longer need to fear this concept. In fact, we should embrace it:

E – L – I – T – I – S – M

Why shouldn’t we be elitist, he asked? Classical musicians represent some of the finest talent on Earth. They spend a lifetime working tirelessly to perfect their craft. We should celebrate that phenomenon, making classical events a special, elite experience.

I cringed. Designing more accessible classical music experiences was core to the “Artistry and Relevance” chapter in my book The Savvy Musician. My message is one of adamant anti-elitism. Or better yet, resolute pro-people-ism.

Is Lebrecht completely wacky, I wondered? Or is my violent resistance simply caused by a closed mind, too attached to personal viewpoints to imagine new possibility? Could becoming more elitist actually help classical music?

Forcing myself to stay open and logical, I pondered whether a valuable lesson could be gleaned from his shocking contention. And after a week of working through this puzzle, here is my epiphany-in-progress.

Elite Access

Without a doubt, there are times where feeling elite motivates. For example, I fly a lot, and cherish my status. Elite Access. That’s what the airline calls it. Going in a special line, getting bumped to first class, raking in miles faster than the other guys. It just feels special, and encourages loyalty. As bizarre as it may sound to a non-frequent flyer, elite status helps define a part of my identity. “I am an elite world traveler.” Spectacular!

Lebrecht suggests that the classical music experience become more selective. More tuxedo…More long pieces…More expensive tickets…Would adopting that paradigm help build loyalty and, in turn, revenue?

Hmmm…

Maybe the problem is that classical musicians today are too much in the middle.

“Anti-elitist” proponents make their concerts more friendly by featuring unusual venues, introducing pieces verbally, permitting the audience to clap between movements, and substituting business casual for wedding formal. But from an event perspective, these shows still pale in comparison to their popular music counterparts. The audiences still listen politely. Performers still hide behind music stands, sit respectfully center stage, and disappear during intermission. There are no light shows, mosh pits, dance competitions, Lady Gaga outfits, or sing-alongs. Such experiences may be profound, but not particularly populist.

On the other hand, consider more “serious” events such as traditional orchestra concerts. The hall is still breathtaking. The pieces are still long and glorious. The musicians still look as serious as brain surgeons. But these otherwise high society events are made slightly more accessible by the availability of cheaper tickets, pre-concert lectures (lectures?), and a conductor who shares some words from the stage. Slightly more approachable for the uninitiated, but also less exclusive.

Splitting the Difference

One gargantuan challenge for most classical organizations is expanding their fan base. The current audience consists primarily of seniors accustomed to time-tested conventions. But they hope to attract younger folks as well, who have different expectations about what a concert experience should deliver. So, in an attempt to be all things to all people, ensembles design some type of middleground that isn’t particularly elitist or populist. Said another way: In an age where many people seek extreme, niche experiences, these groups split the difference.

Two Classical Musics

Maybe we need two classical musics. Classical-A is exclusive, hardly available to the masses. For Elite Access, you must pony up, dress up, and pay up. Anyone who learns this club’s secret handshake is far above average. They are exceptional human beings with exceptional taste.

Classical-B provides hip, fun, interactive entertainment presented in user-friendly formats. The only audience these events discriminate against are ultra-snobby stuffed shirts, who eat caviar while wearing a monocle on their yacht. Of course, Classical-B still features extraordinary virtuosity, beauty, and many other unique dimensions its creators can access. But this is first and foremost an art of the people.

Cages & Rainbows

Norman Lebrecht may have rattled my cage, suggesting that expanded elitism might be good for classical music. It’s doubtful I’ll be joining that camp anytime soon. I’m too busy fighting for new audiences. For the opportunity to touch many more lives, not fewer.

But perhaps there’s a pot of gold on both ends of this rainbow. The trick is committing to one side.

What do you think?

The Value of One Tiny Tweet

Lisa Canning — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 10:45:59 +0000

Last night when I sat down to get ready to begin my social media class, I started up my computer and up popped Oprah Winfrey’s face and a Skype request to connect to her. Talk about a surprise. I wrote Oprah about nine months ago. She is the only “celebrity” I have ever written a letter to. Think it’s really her? Doubt it. Scammers are everywhere online.

Anyway, my social media class is run by Angel Oakley, Unicatis Marketing- quite the “branding” gal. In class we spent some time talking about the value of Twitter. Angel shared this video with us. It’s an interesting clip of Gary Vaynerchuk hanging out with ” The Harper Studio peeps“. Watch how he converts them into Twitter believers.

So did Gary convert you into a twitter believer too? He couldn’t convert me because I already have a ( fledgling) Twitter account @IAEOU. Remember: business skills are to artists like vowels are to words- pretty basic and necessary. But Gary did convince me to follow him @garyvee. Learn more about Gary @ http://garyvaynerchuk.com/

Gary Vaynerchuk is a 35 year old New York Times and Wall Street Journal Best-Selling author who is also a self-trained wine and social media expert. Gary does not claim to be a ‘techie’, but in 2005, he began video blogging and now has close to 1 million followers on Twitter and was included in Business Week’s list of the top 20 people every entrepreneur should follow. Pretty amazing self made creative entrepreneur really.