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.

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.

1. Microsoft – more than 20 percent of their annual revenue or $11.5 billion
2. Coca-Cola – more than $2.5 billion
3. Yahoo – more than 20 percent of their annual revenue or $1.3 billion
4. eBay – 14 percent to 15 percent of its revenue – which was $871 million, much of that to advertise on Google
5. Google – In the millions rather than billions of dollars – with $188 million
6. 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.

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?

How can we turn our imaginations into productive creativity?  How can we use the arts to activate others imaginations and help facilitate the transform of them into creative productivity?

In my post Imagination, Creativity and Productivity I mentioned a long list of creative theorists who each have developed their own methodology for helping individuals and teams transform their imaginations into productive creativity. How can their ideas be applied, or further illuminate through an art form? In my post on October 10th I explored Min Basadur’s Creative Problem Solving Profile. In today’s post I will explore Edward deBono’s Six Thinking Hats.

About Edward deBono

Edward deBono, founder of The deBono Group,  is a leading authority in the field of creative thinking, innovation and the direct teaching of thinking as a skill.  Dr. de Bono holds an MA in psychology and physiology from Oxford, as well as a D. Phil (a research degree) in Medicine as well as a Ph.D. from Cambridge. He has held faculty appointments at the universities of Oxford, Cambridge, London and Harvard.  His instruction in thinking has been utilized by IBM, Prudential, Microsoft, Chick-Fil-A, BP,  Nokia, Siemens, Bosch, Quaker, Ericsson,  and many others.

Dr. deBono is also the founder of the World Academy of New Thinking™ (WANT).  ‘New Thinking’ means new perceptions, fresh alternatives, a change of emphasis and the generation and design of new concepts and ideas. The role of this Academy is specifically concerned with new thinking in conflict resolution, problem solving, economic development, education, health and most areas effecting daily life.

Dr. deBono has written over 70 book. Here is a partial list of books he has written:  New Think, Mechanism of Mind, Six Thinking Hats, Lateral Thinking, Serious Creativity, I Am Right-You Are Wrong, Parallel Thinking, Conflicts-A Better Way to Resolve Them, Water Logic, Simplicity, Teaching Thinking, New Thinking for the New Millennium, PO: A Device for Successful Thinking, and Future Positive.

Six Thinking Hats & The Parallel Thinking Process

In 1999 Edward deBono developed a creativity technique designed to facilitate the shifting of focused thought for creative thinking and innovation to emerge. A process, which he calls  Six Thinking Hats®,  is a parallel thinking process. Parallel Thinking®, also developed by deBono, is where each thinker puts forward his or her thoughts in parallel with the thoughts of others; without attacking the thoughts of others.

After all, when A and B come together, each with an idea, its normal for each to want to judge, or debate, the merits of the other persons idea.  Its human nature for it to be difficult for A and B to stand side by side and allow their ideas to remain parallel to each other, without comparison, synthesis or judgment, so each can be fully explored. The reason for this is because argument is the basis of what most consider normal thinking. The purest form of this type of thinking comes from our courts of law where the prosecution takes one side of the argument and the defense the other side. Each strives to prove the other side wrong. The “truth” is to be reached by argument.

While there is a place for argument, and while argument is a useful tool of thinking, argument is inadequate as the main and only tool of thinking. Argument lacks constructive energies, design energies, and creative energies. Pointing out faults may lead to some improvement but does not construct something new. Equally synthesizing both points of view does not produce a stream of new alternatives. As such, traditional argument is totally useless to construct an innovative design process. To begin to do this, according to de Bono, we must separate out all of the different aspects of our thinking about an idea.

So how do we do this?

Think of full-color printing. When the basic color separations are made, each basic color is printed separately onto the same sheet to give us full-color printing. In the same way, when we separate the modes of our thinking and then apply each mode to the same subject, we end up with full-color thinking on the subject.

With deBono’s Six Thinking Hat Method the thinker can separate their thinking into six clear functions and roles.  For example, if the thinker metaphorically puts on the yellow hat, he or she may turn up new ideas which may cause the thinker to change his or her mind about the value of the idea. Likewise, when asked to think about the idea wearing a black hat a thinker who began as a euphoric supporter for it may discover difficulties that reduce their euphoria. Each thinking role is identified with a colored symbolic “thinking hat.” below.

	The White Hat calls for information known or needed. “The facts, just the facts.” The white hat represents neutral and objective thinking, and is concerned with facts and information.
	The Yellow Hat symbolizes brightness and optimism. Under this hat you explore the positives and probe for value and benefit.The yellow hat represents sunny and positive thinking, and is concerned with what has worked in the past.
	The Black Hat is judgment or why something may not work. Spot the difficulties and dangers; where things might go wrong. Probably the most powerful and useful of the Hats but a problem if overused.The black hat represents careful and cautious thinking, and is sometimes referred to as the “devil’s advocate” hat.
	The Red Hat signifies feelings, hunches and intuition. When using this hat you can express emotions and feelings and share fears, likes, dislikes, loves, and hates.The red hat represents the emotional view, which never has to be justified.
	The Green Hat focuses on creativity; the possibilities, alternatives, and new ideas. It’s an opportunity to express new concepts and new perceptions.The green hat is associated with creativity and new ideas.
	The Blue Hat is used to manage the thinking process. It’s the control mechanism that ensures the Six Thinking Hats® guidelines are observed.The blue hat represents the orchestration of the multi-hat thinking process.

Today in business, as elsewhere, there is a huge need to be constructive and creative. There is a need to solve problems and to open up opportunities. There is a need to design new possibilities, not just to argue between two existing possibilities. deBono’s Six Hats method allows for all sides of an issue to be fully explored. Adversarial confrontation is replaced by a cooperative exploration of the subject allowing for ideas to become creative productivity.

Calling all Chicago Creatives!

Regardless of your background,entrepreneurs and artists are visionaries, each in our own way. We all want to make a difference, create and be innovative. Isn’t it cool to try and prove that creating the “impossible” isn’t that hard to do?

How can we improve the chances that productivity will flow from our imagination or our creativity?  For starters we need to think of imagination and creativity as distinctively different. These two words should not be used interchangeably.

Think of it like this. If you can visualize something in your mind- the famous person you hope to marry, your first house, the new car you want to buy or your first trip to a new planet in the solar system, then you are a living breathing IMAGINATIVE human being. All humans posses and can access this amazing power in various strengths.

However,  accessing this power source-while an INCREDIBLY important 1st step- does not require action. We can dream all day and visualize whatever we wish without obligation to render what we see. Here is where the next step comes. To transform our imagination into creativity requires a far more complicated ability-  to transform what we envision in our heads into a reality. This requires a sequence of steps that move our thought processes back and forth between our left ” hard skills” and our right “soft skills”.

Helping individuals transform their active imaginations into productive and hopefully innovative creativity is certainly a lot harder to do. It’s no wonder 60%’s of CEO’s surveyed by IBM in 2010 are concerned about developing a more creative work force to help them  innovate their organizations, huh?

But the real dilemma is how are we suppose to help our world become more creative when there are SO many theorists who have written their own theory about how to sequence the steps between right and left to access one’s creativity?

Let’s see, you have Osborn’s 7 stage model in 1953, and Koberg and Bagnall in 1976. Parnes model in 1977, Amabile’s in 1988 and Mumford’s in 1991. And before them, there was Wallas, Dewey, Rossman, Guilford, Stanislawski, Gordon, Kepner-Tregoe, Arnold, Churchman,  and Zwicky. This is starting to look like the cereal aisle. Confusing! Which “theory” is the right one to help me be more creative?

Some researchers have attempted to identify creativity through cognitive aptitude and personality tests like  MacKinnon 1962, Guilford 1967; and Torrance in  1974. Others have isolated personal creative characteristics described as “cognitive styles” – Kirton did in 1976 in his “problem solving styles” -Basadur 1990 and Selby wrote their own in 2004, as did Prather in  2008.  And if that’s not enough to confuse you, then look at Csikszentmihalyi 1996 assertion that it is complexity, not specific traits or following a thought process, that is the discerning factor in producing a creative personality. Here is his list.

With so many theories about how to ignite creativity, the water seems terribly murky as to exactly how best to generate more of it productively. And so, yet another researcher enters the picture. It’s Ned Herrmann who introduced his whole brain theory model back in 1998 that has become quite popular now-especially as an employee assessment tool.

According to Herrmann, 5% of the population uses one of the 4 quadrants in their brain. 55% use two quadrants. 35% use three quadrants and only 5% use all four quadrants.  Herrmann’s research shows that the more of our brain we use- the closer to “whole brain thinking” we achieve- the more we are able to synthesize information CREATIVELY into productive outcomes. The data reveals that both the right (creative) and the left (linear) need to be full activated to produce the greatest level of productivity.  According to Herrmann’s research this can be developed through synthesis of skills across right and left.  Senior and “C-level” executives tend to be more whole brained in their thinking.

And these are exactly the kind of leaders we need more of to solve our worlds problems.

Portfolio career is the term used to describe a professional path involving multiple streams of income. This profile is commonly adopted by artists of all stripes. I, for one, have developed a portfolio career, and wouldn’t have it any other way.

Advantages of a portfolio career include:

• The opportunity to control your own activities and schedule
• A flexible framework for reaching earning objectives
• A variety of activities and challenges
• A structure that enables you to pursue passion projects
• Interaction with multiple communities, allowing for great networking
• Freedom from corporate politics
• If you don’t get a full-time job, this may be your only option

Assuming you enjoy variety, the primary disadvantage of a portfolio career is that most of this most work is self-employed. You’ve got to hustle, market effectively, and create a solid career model. After all, no one else will do it for you. You must also be extremely good at time management.

This series of posts will help you design a blueprint for a portfolio career that reaches your earning objectives.

Step 1: DETERMINE WORK CATEGORIES

With your skills, interests, attributes, and connections, begin by determining major income stream categories where time and energy might be divided. Limit this list to seven entries. Here are the large-scale categories of my career:

1. Composing
2. Performing
3. Teaching
4. “Expert services”

Expert services refer to activities built around a particular platform, or what I call a Powerhouse Topic. For more information, click here. My powerhouse topic is built around arts careers/entrepreneurship. 

1. Merchandise sales
2. Writing
3. Miscellaneous

Please note that there may be more than one way to group income streams. For example, composing and performing might be combined under the single heading Musician Services. The important thing is to organize categories in a way that makes sense to you.

Step 2: BREAK DOWN CATEGORIES

Within each large-scale category, go into more detail. What specific types of activities might you do? Since we’re just at the brainstorming phase, feel free to list as many options as imaginable, even if all don’t wind up being part of your eventual plan. Again, here is my list, with comments in boxes.

1. Composing/arranging
   • Commissions 
   • Royalties 
   • Prizes & grants 

While competitive awards like prizes and grants can certainly provide income, it’s usually unwise to depend on them as reliable revenue. 

1. Performing
   • Concerts (headlining) 
   • Gigs (background music)
   • Accompanying
   • Other playing work

Notice that concerts and gigs are separated here. Someone else might lump them into a single sub-category, which is fine. To me, they feel like very different activities, and require unique marketing to acquire.

1. Teaching
   • College teaching
   • Private lessons
   • Teaching artistry
   • Festivals & camps

I actually have a full-time college teaching position. Just because you have a job (with an external employer) doesn’t mean that a varied portfolio career isn’t possible or desirable for you.

1. “Expert services”
   • Speaking engagements
   • Consulting
   • Private mentoring

If your powerhouse topic is something people care about, a number of professional opportunities become available. Better yet, being known as an expert often leads to additional work in other categories.

1. Merchandise sales
   • Book sales (through distributors/wholesalers/dealers)
   • Book sales (through website/back of the room)
   • Musical score sales
   • Recording sales

Two categories of book sales are listed here.  That’s because the earning structure is quite different depending on where and how it sells.

Notice that score sales are listed under Merchandise. They could just as easily have been placed under Composing/Arranging. In your blueprint, place streams where they make the most sense to you.

1. Writing
   • Books
   • Blogs
   • Articles

It’s only the rare occasion when I get paid for writing blogs or articles. (The financial benefits are indirect.) But they play an significant role in my schedule. In a portfolio career, think not only about what will earn income, but also where time must be spent.

1. Miscellaneous
   • Investment income
   • Conducting
   • Other

We will discuss passive income sources, such as that produced by investments, later in this series. If this money is generated specifically for a long-term purpose such as retirement, you may not want to include it in your income model.

OBSERVATIONS

Here are a few observations when reflecting on the model above:

• Quantity. My Portfolio Career Blueprint includes seven large-scale work categories and 24 sub-categories.  Don’t feel pressured to have that many streams. A portfolio career may have as few as two to four focuses. On the other hand, some people do much more than I do.
• Variety. Most of my entries have at least something to do with music or the arts. But they don’t need to. Many artists pursue a much wider array of activities: playing music, cooking, website development, day care, painting, dog walking, etc.
• Brainstorm. Remember, at the brainstorming phase, you only need to determine areas where you might earn income. In the eventual model, some of these paths may ultimately disappear.

Stay tuned for part 2…

There is an unspoken social contract the world has made with artists. It goes something like this: “We love what you do, you inspire us. But you don’t live in the “real” world so you couldn’t possibly economically revive us.”

If your an artist reading this post, and you truly wish to enter into other sectors of society in meaningful ways to help our broken world, the reality of bumping into the invisible wall is real. Trust me. I am living the dream and working at the wall and focused on dismantling it one brick at a time.

And if you are one of those folks who might have made this social contract with us artists, knowingly or unconsciously, reading this post?  It’s time to let go of it and find some 21st century innovative artists who will offer you a far better ROI than you can imagine.

I was told the other day by a seasoned technology entrepreneur, venture capital and angel investor that “…people all the time lie to us- we expect it. One of the ingredients to becoming an entrepreneur is to thicken your skin and learn to ignore it and rise above it. It’s probably one of the reasons why so many entrepreneurs are assholes when they succeed really.”

I have to tell you this does not work for me. Imagine what would happen to our work and new businesses if the basis for all we do was built instead on trust and collaboration?

Get the picture?

Artists do you see the potency of the work in front of us to do?

If the world we live in now was built on a lack of trust and a lack of collaboration- which it has been- let’s create our own entrepreneurial opportunities to help ourselves and others prosper by teaching the virtue and benefits of ethical conduct and true collaboration through our artistry. Imagine just how vibrant our world would be.

This is what the arts have to offer IF we develop the skills to translate our creativity and standard of conduct into meaningful ways to others.

Who will join me at the invisible wall?

I need a dump truck now please. But I am in search of a fleet…

Our 2010 most read posts are interestingly some oldies but goodies. From our top 25, 14 are from 2007 through 2009. Our oldest post from 2007, which also happens to be our #1 post, is about my  journey writing a book.

So for all you writers out there, this list just goes to show you that it’s important to get your writing our there because its more likely to become well read with the passage of time.

#1 Starving Artist Not
#2 The Four C’s of 21st Century Education
#3 Oh the places you’ll go by Dr Seuss
#4 Tongue twisters for actors and speakers
#5 Characteristics of successful entrepreneurs
#6 Ten steps to finding your artistic voice
#7 Best and worst marketing campaigns
#8 How to create a badge for your blog
#9 An artistic entrepreneurial case study: The story of blue man group
#10 Ben Cameron on change transformation and renewal in the arts
#11 One blank piece of paper
#12 Dinner in the sky
#13 Conservatory made me successful in business
#14 How to make your creativity explode create your own strategic implode
#15 North Africa Economic Partership announced between Aspen Institute and U.S. Department of State
#16 Top 20 arts entrepreneur blogs
#17 What does fame mean to you?
#18 I’m not an entertainer. I’m a lot closer to a paramedic, a firefighter, a rescue worker
#19 Artists as social entrepreneurs
#20 Our dirty little family secret
#21 The definition of a calculated risk
#22 Innovating through artistry
#23 Paradigm shifts build innovative companies
#24 Overcoming mediocrity
#25 What is your imagination worth to you?

Lisa Canning, Founder of EntrepreneurTheArts.com, TheIAE.com and LisasClarinetShop.com

Well, today I leave for Washington for my first PNB-NAPEO (Partners for a New Beginning- North Africa Partners for Economic Opportunity) Summit. Madeline Albright will kick off our meeting and then we will spend two days in meetings that range from a PNB overview from the ground to Entrepreneurship for Women in the Middle East to clean water initiatives. Great stuff.

IAE is supported by Partners for a New Beginning’s North Africa Partnership for Economic Opportunity (PNB-NAPEO), a public-private partnership created by the U.S. Department of State.  The mission of PNB-NAPEO is to build a network of entrepreneurs and business leaders in the United States and North Africa where both communities can identify projects that will foster entrepreneurship and job creation, especially for youth.

The meeting will be loaded with a lot of business folks interested in PNB’s mission from different vantage points. Gosh, what a big help this is going to be to The IAE. And what fun it is going to be attending such a high-voltage education oriented networking meeting. This will be a great opportunity to grow my network of support for The IAE and continue the transformation process- from idea into reality. Are YOU ready to transform from a caterpillar with 16 legs into a butterfly who, with just a single pair of wings, can fly?)

At the Summit, I am looking forward to meeting Naeem Zafar. Check out this blog post he wrote about the initiative.

Check out these ebooks that Naeem has written. I can’t wait to meet him. Imagine the possibilities for art and culture, as a ‘sector’, to create innovative new businesses and job strands in the U.S. and North Africa? I am.

Market Research on a Shoestring!

Get a Reality check on your big idea for under $100. By Naeem Zafar, University of California, Berkeley

Entrepreneurs don’t like to do market research. Whether they find it unnecessary, think it takes too much time and money, or are simply terrified by the idea, they often start up their businesses without the necessary preparation or understanding of exactly what they are getting into.

But market research doesn’t have to be an expensive, unbearably time-consuming nightmare. It is an essential aspect of starting a new business that can be conducted quickly and easily if you know what to look for and where to look. Market Research on a Shoestring is full of techniques, tricks, and secrets that will help you ask the right questions and find the answers you need to better understand your business and the market it faces. If you want to raise funds for your startup or simply maximize your chances of success, you need this book!

 

Get Funded!

A Definitive Guide to Seeking the right funding at the right time and from the right source
By Naeem Zafar, University of California, Berkeley

Entrepreneurs need funding at various stages of their companies’growth. This to-the-point book is your essential guide to the funding process. Organized into three sections, this book outlines the likely sources of funding and how they operate, how to approach investors, and the 12-step process of getting funded.

As a valuable bonus, Get Funded! includes the names of several hundred angel investors and venture capital firms.

If you are serious about seeking funding for your startup or simply want to know your options, you need this book! This book is the complete guide to seeking and getting funding that all entrepreneurs look for and seldom find.

 

The Entrepreneur’s Legal Guide to Starting Up

By Naeem Zafar, University of California, Berkeley

A simple, to-the-point guide that outlines the decisions all entrepreneurs must make when setting up a legal entity. This eBook is packed with practical, time-tested tips and suggestions about incorporation, hiring the right lawyer, registering patents, and
minimizing your legal bill. The eBook includes a step-by-step guide to finding and hiring the right lawyer for your company and offers proven strategies that will save you thousands on your legal bill. There’s also an easy-to-understand chart explaining the differences between the various corporate structures and offering a quick guide to the most common legal issues plaguing entrepreneurs, as well as effective methods for overcoming them.

Knowing the ins and outs of setting up a startup and picking the right lawyer isn’t a matter of intelligence—it’s about experience and expertise. You may have a great deal of both when it comes to your industry, but most entrepreneurs don’t know much about the law. Your strengths lie elsewhere. As a result, you may find yourself intimidated by the idea of selecting legal counsel.

 

The Definitive Entrepreneur’s Guide to Lawyers:

35 Little-known facts, secrets, techniques, and tricks to making sure you get every penny’s worth of value from your lawyer By Naeem Zafar, University of California, Berkeley

Containing nearly three dozen money-saving, angst-minimizing tips, The Definitive Entrepreneur’s Guide to Lawyers is a go-to resource for the entrepreneur who wants to streamline the budget while leveraging the most effective legal services available. The guide includes a step-by-step guide to finding and hiring the right lawyer for your company, an easy-to-understand chart explaining the differences between the various corporate structures, proven communication strategies that will slash your legal bill by half each month, and a quick guide to the most common legal issues plaguing entrepreneurs, as well as effective methods for overcoming them.

Knowing the ins and outs of picking the right lawyer isn’t a matter of intelligence—it’s about experience and expertise. You may have a great deal of both when it comes to your industry, but most entrepreneurs don’t know much about the law. Your strengths lie elsewhere. As a result, you may find yourself intimidated by the idea of selecting legal counsel.

 

Finance Essentials for entrepreneurs:
A Simple Guide to Understanding and Creating Financial Statements for Your Business. By Naeem Zafar, University of California, Berkele

Finance Essentials for Entrepreneurs is a startup owner’s indispensable guide to basic finance. Zafar draws on two decades of entrepreneurial experience to create an eBook that offers a simple, proven method for understanding the most important elements of financial management for businesses. Zafar understands what entrepreneurs need to know about business finance. He also knows that their time is precious. In Finance Essentials for Entrepreneurs, he delivers that knowledge in practical, to-the-point language free of technical jargon and longwinded discourses. Spreadsheet examples
are clear and relevant.

 

About Naeem Zafar

• A member of the faculty of the Haas business school at the University of California Berkeley, Naeem teaches Entrepreneurship and Innovation in the MBA program. Naeem is the founder of Concordia Ventures and focuses on educating and advising entrepreneurs on all aspects of starting and running a company. Naeem’s entrepreneurial experience includes working directly with six startups, and he has extensive experience in mentoring and coaching founders and CEOs. Naeem is now the president and CEO of Bitzer Mobile, a company that simplifies enterprise mobility.
• Until 2007, Naeem was the president and CEO of Pyxis Technology Inc., a company specializing in advanced chip design software for nanometer technology. Naeem has also been president and CEO of two other high tech startups (Silicon Design Systems and Veridicom, a Bell Labs spin-off that invented the silicon fingerprint sensors today found on most laptops). Naeem has held senior marketing and engineering positions at several companies including Quickturn Design Systems that had an IPO in 1993 and grew to $125M in revenues.
• Naeem holds a Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering from Brown University (magna cum laude), Rhode Island, and a master’s degree in electrical engineering from the University of Minnesota.
• Naeem is a charter member of TiE (The Indus Entrepreneurs www.TiE.org ).He is also a charter member of OPEN (www.OPENSiliconValley.com ) where he serves as the president.

 

It’s been an exciting week!  Since my article What Professional Orchestras Should Learn from YouTube was posted, many conversations have erupted, debating the question of whether initiatives embraced by YouTube’s Symphony Orchestra are appropriate and helpful for professional groups.

As is the case when any significant institutional change is proposed, reactions ranged wildly.  Many were enthusiastic about suggestions; others dug in their heels, insisting that alterations to the current paradigm are merely capitulations, disgraceful, or even apocalyptic.  Wherever you stand, engaging in the conversation marks an important step. 

One recurring question is whether adopting my suggestions compromises artistic integrity. For example, Evanston Symphony Orchestra conductor Lawrence Eckerling wrote this thoughtful response to the suggestion that a greater variety of shorter works be programmed on some concerts, possibly including individual movements:

While in principle I agree…this is an apparent “dumbing down” of the art. The “greatest hits” mentality is akin to iTunes and tracks vs. albums. Performing just favorites or the most accessible movements is fine to do on an occasional concert, but when done as the regular diet is not doing the art form any service.  

To frame my views on the issue of dumbing down, here is an excerpt from a chapter in The Savvy Musician called “Artistry and Relevance”:

It seems that many musicians are squarely positioned on one side or the other when it comes to music and audience. Are there just two extreme, polar-opposite options: interactive user-friendly formats with shallow expressions, or intimidating academic presentations with depth? Whether musicians offer profound statements but fail to connect with their audience, or dumb down their product in order to attract one, they are making sophisticated music less relevant.

A third archetype exists—one that seeks a happy medium between accessibility and integrity. The more foreign, complicated, or out of the comfort zone an experience is for observers, the more essential audience-engaging tactics become. On the other hand, when extra-musical elements and accessible formats are embraced, programmers should not cower at the incorporation of profound adventurous musical offerings. Perhaps this hybrid can engage proponents of both sides, submitting a middle ground that can be embraced by both the musical bourgeoisie and the masses.

In response to Eckerling’s concern…Suggesting that some events embrace the variety show model in no way implies that works chosen should be limited to the most accessible and well-known. 

Au contraire.  This model permits programmers the option of incorporating more adventurous programming than typically occurs: lesser known works, obscure composers, new music, even the avant-garde.  When the goal itself is eclecticism, many contemporary audiences are willing—even eager—to explore new terrain. At least for a few minutes.  This structure actually provides a vehicle for smartening up programming.

Whether we like it or not, we live in the iTunes Era.  Many people buy tracks, not albums.  Selling only albums scares off potential fans. Which brings us to someone else’s comment:

I don’t agree that other orchestras should take this approach. YouTube is interesting fluff, but not comparable to a real, live concert experience. As for performing parts of pieces, would you read parts of novels, see parts of plays or movies, eat part of your dinner, and call it a complete experience?

The analogies here are interesting.  Let’s explore:

• Food.  Restaurants specializing in tapas are all the rage.  My favorite, Café Tu Tu Tango, serves only appetizers from around the world.  (Incidentally, they also display/sell work by local artists, with the catch phrase “Food for the Starving Artist.”) 
• Love. Since speed dating was introduced in 1998, hundreds of thousands of singles have participated.
• Travel. Just about every travel company offers tours featuring a wide variety of experiences and locations in a short amount of time.  These packages are exponentially more popular than those limited to the same city or activity for extended periods.
• Education. Every university offers survey courses.  Typically, students only enroll in specialty classes after completing the survey. 

The assertion that no professional orchestra should consider a variety show format is just as preposterous as one arguing that every event must adopt this approach.  Some audiences today are drawn to deep and consistent encounters; others prefer to spend their valuable time experiencing an assortment; still others are excited by both models. 

And let’s not forget, the YTSO did offer a “real, live concert experience.”  It was sold out, and viewed 33 million times worldwide.  How can that possibly be a bad thing?

Another comment:

It is indeed true that we face a short attention span…But the reason why is sad – a simple lack of education. America is growing dumber by the hour and taking the whole world with it.

We could certainly debate this claim.  But for now, let’s assume the statement is true.  What if Americans are, in fact, getting dumber?  Orchestras have a choice. Should they:

1. Spend time and energy bitterly complaining about how dumb the world has become?
2. Dismiss anyone who isn’t interested in the “smart” work they do, continuing business as usual and appealing only to the elite few who “get it”?
3. Work pro-actively to find new solutions that engage the larger population, creating innovative, appealing offerings that meet people at their level while smartening them up?

What do you think orchestras should do?  I know my choice.

SUMMARY

In a week where the Syracuse Symphony disbanded, New York City Opera suspended its Fall season, and Detroit Symphony remains on life support, it is apparent that most arts organizations have little choice but to change in significant ways to remain relevant, impactful, and fundable.  Denying this is the surest path towards extinction.  Please don’t wait until it’s too late.

The question, then, is how to best evolve.  I believe that the YouTube Symphony Orchestra provided some possible clues. 

When modifications are implemented, however, artists/administrators have a responsibility to ask whether they dumb down or smarten up offerings.  Proposed initiatives themselves could go either way; it will take savvy visionaries to ensure that better engaging audiences doesn’t mean cowering to them.   Consider the potential:

• Building relationships between players and audience.  When trust and personal relationships are strengthened, audience members become more invested, willing to stretch, and experience even the unfamiliar. 
• Varied programming.  Including more works on a given concert provides the opportunity for adventuresome programming, at least for some pieces. 
• Visual elements.  Visual elements that support the music (as opposed to superficial gimmickry with little artistic meaning) provide audiences with an entry point, allowing for more sophisticated music to be showcased.

Maybe, just maybe, the affect of modifying symphony orchestra models will do more than attract new interest.  Perhaps savvy visionaries can find solutions that smarten up our fans and offerings as well.

These days, when symphony orchestras make national news, the topic is usually not a happy one. Yet one group has received a very different kind of coverage: the YouTube Symphony Orchestra (YTSO). Culminating in a performance at Australia’s Sydney Opera House on March 20, 2011, this experiment has generated unprecedented buzz and excitement.

True, when considering professional orchestras and the YouTube version, we’re not comparing apples with apples. Nonetheless, struggling orchestras can—and should—learn valuable lessons from YouTube about what it may require to remain viable and relevant in the 21^st Century.

AUDITION PROCESS

With traditional symphony orchestras, applicants audition behind a screen. This system was implemented to ensure that players would be selected based on the single criteria of outstanding performance.

The YTSO took a different approach. Initially, candidates applied via video. The conductor whittled down a short list of players who were outstanding enough to participate in the group. But then, finalists engaged in Internet campaigns, where fans were encouraged to vote for their favorites. Those with the highest ballot count were likely to get the gig.

This process has understandably received some criticism. Will people with better marketing and social media chops be more apt to advance, even if their playing isn’t quite as strong? Perhaps. But isn’t that exactly what orchestras need? More members actively advocating, cultivating a following, and motivating their own networks.

Imagine the institutional transformation that would occur if orchestras broadened their audition process. After selecting a small group of qualified finalists, what if candidates were asked about their ideas on marketing, connecting with audiences, and building a following? Or if local communities were encouraged to decide who they wanted to represent them in their orchestra?

The reason more people don’t patronize the local orchestra isn’t because they aren’t good enough. It is because they’re not relevant enough.

RELATIONSHIP BUILDING

During the YTSO show, video profiles of several members were projected. These montages explored the lives, backgrounds, challenges, and joys of members. In other words, musicians weren’t simply interchangeable cogs who happened to sit on a stage together. They were real human beings with unique personalities and amazing talents.

People become more excited about art when they feel connected to artists. Professional orchestra members can: speak at concerts, interact during intermissions, be featured in videos, become media personalities, blog, lead pre-concert talks, offer engaging outreach activities, etc.

Eliminate anonymity and watch interest grow.

PROGRAMMING

Conventional wisdom for orchestral programming contends the following:

1. People only want to hear the classics they already know and love.
2. Long or multi-movement works must be programmed in full.
3. People come to orchestra concerts for the sole purpose of hearing orchestral music.

The YouTube event blew gaping holes through these theories. One of the best received works was the premier performance of Mason Bate’s “Mothership.” Isolated movements of several works were included. This made it possible to program no less than a dozen works on this program. And nestled in the program was a solo organ Toccata by Bach and a didgeridoo feature with percussion accompaniment.

Some individuals, myself included, can be excited by hearing just a few wonderful extended masterworks on a concert. But many people today are more inclined to enjoy a greater assortment of musical experiences and traditions—new and old; familiar and unfamiliar; solo, chamber, and full ensemble.

VISUAL ELEMENTS

The YTSO event was stunning visually. Projections accompanied almost every piece, including live streaming, lighting extravaganzas, and even the work of a sand animator. Clearly, the YTSO spent months and considerable financial capital ensuring that this event looked amazing.

Such visual spectacle is impossible to expect from orchestras with different shows on a regular basis. But a little attention goes a long way. The incorporation of even small amounts of dance, video, slides, lighting, or staging can make an enormous impact, especially if done tastefully. In fact, just having musicians smile and physically connect to the sound produced can move an audience.

Some folks argue, “great music should stand on its own.” And perhaps that’s true. But in this visual age of YouTube, it’s simply not the reality for many young and middle-aged audiences that orchestras so desperately need to attract.

And despite expert suggestions to the contrary, visual elements aren’t inherently distractions. On the contrary, they can be the key to drawing people towards your music.

TECHNOLOGY

Not surprisingly, this YouTube event had a heavy emphasis on technology.

• All players were given a website and smartphone app, powered by InstantEncore.com.
• All players were given a Samsung Nexus S phone, enabling them to easily capture and upload video.
• Thousands of YouTube videos—auditions, video diaries, rehearsals, concerts, reflections —are publically available.
• Every member contributed online content.
• Their event was available for free viewing via YouTube, the YTSO app, and every individual member’s website.
• In total, there were 1.8 million unique live viewers; within two weeks, it had been streamed over 33 million times to 189 countries!

While technology alone can’t solve all of the challenges facing symphony orchestras today, it can be an enormous instrument for cultivating audiences and generating excitement.

With this in mind, symphony orchestras should post video content regularly. All members should be encouraged to maintain a visible web presence and contribute to the organization’s blog. Fans should find ample opportunities to post comments, network, vote (favorite pieces?), share concert photos, and download recordings from events attended (gratis or for a small price).

Use the tool of technology to help build something great: an audience for the future.

A FRESH LOOK FORWARD

In several ways, the YTSO event embraced traditional orchestral rituals. It incorporated standard literature featuring standard instrumentation in a standard concert hall setting. But it also built upon these traditions in innovative and forward-looking ways. These unique, and sometimes controversial, solutions clearly generated a buzz.

We must face the obvious truth: It takes more than great art to thrive in today’s world. In order for professional orchestras to avoid extinction, re-invention is necessary.

Yet I remain optimistic. Professional symphony orchestras already provide outstanding and powerful art. And now they have a new role model that offers a possible path forward: the YouTube Symphony Orchestra.

Dr. David Cutler balances a varied career as a jazz and classical composer, pianist, educator, arranger, conductor, collaborator, concert producer, author, blogger, consultant, speaker, advocate, and entrepreneur. His book The Savvy Musician (www.savvymusician.com) helps musicians 1) build a career, 2) earn a living, & 3) make a difference.

Artist Robin Monique Rios combines several business ventures in 4Art Inc. in Bridgeport; Photo courtesy of 4Art Inc.

This article appeared on March 8th at SmallBizChicago. It was written by intern Hallie Busta who is also a journalism student at Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill.

Robin Monique Rios has been an artist since childhood, but only in recent years has her penchant for art become the basis of several profitable ventures.

From an 11,000-square-foot space at the Zhou B Art Center in Bridgeport, Rios runs 4Art Inc., a gallery featuring her work and that of nine other artists. But the location is also home to Rios’ other business ventures, including website and graphic design services and art framing. “I know this is where I’m supposed to be,” she said. “I know that with every fiber of my being.”

Shedding the starving artist image

Though Rios said financial gain is not her primary motive, she considers herself a small business owner. That makes her part of a growing number of artists who are trying to debunk the “starving artist” stereotype by seeking out ways to turn a profit from their crafts, said Joe Roberts, professor of arts entrepreneurship at Columbia College in Chicago.

As the Internet makes platforms for creating and selling art more accessible, some experts note a dynamic shift in artists’ roles as entrepreneurs.  “If they don’t marry that passion up with a business mindset … that’s where a lot of them fail,” said Michele Markey, director of the FastTrac entrepreneurship program at the Kansas City, Mo.-based Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.  Markey said the growing trend toward arts-based entrepreneurship has been spurred in part by an unstable job market and an increased desire among some for a creative career track.

But artists increasingly must use skills outside of their primary practice to make their arts ventures profitable, Roberts said. “If your passion is the arts, why would you not find a way to make a living?” he said.

For Lance Brett Hall, that meant using his collegiate studies in theatre direction and acting-coaching to start the Chicago-based Launch Pad Casting Workshop, providing budding actors with direct feedback not often available outside of acting school or auditions, he said. But he quickly saw the importance of being business-savvy, something that required skills he had yet to tap into. “Business was always the furthest thing from my mind, so there’s been a steep learning curve,” he said.

Keeping costs low

Unlike Rios, who started with a $20,000 business loan through ACCION Chicago and now uses her framing and design businesses to subsidize her gallery, Hall said he has been able to finance his own lower-cost venture himself. He said he uses free space at Lincoln Park’s Greenhouse Theater Center and developed his website himself.

Hall pays the directors who judge his acting clients between $100 and $250 each, depending on their experience level, and spends a small amount of money on snacks and bottled water.

Actors pay $50 per workshop. While eight registered for his November session, Hall expects 20 to register for a workshop in April. After that, he hopes to hold a workshop every six weeks.

But shifting gears to turn a profit can be difficult, he said. “It’s tough for an artist to really believe in a product or deliverable when it’s not the art form you trained in,” he said.

Lisa Canning, founder and director of the Institute for Arts Entrepreneurship in Chicago, agrees that the role change can be challenging. She said the institute strives to help artists leverage their skills to start a business through its workshops and support programs. In September, it will launch a two-year certificate program in arts entrepreneurship development, she said.

Part of that program will encourage artists to use technology to launch a website or, as their business goals evolve, develop an arts-based tech business such as website design, she said.

Artists in the program also will develop a non-traditional business plan called a “business canvas,” Canning said, plotting out their ventures in a way that fits their individual work patterns, not necessarily by recording it on paper, she said.

Creating business plans

Roberts teaches his students to complete a business journal, similar to a conventional business plan but without an exit strategy. While a traditional venture might look to sell the business or go public, artists often produce their art regardless of whether they have customers, he said. No matter how artists choose to format their plan, they should explain their business and how they will earn a living from it, he said.

Rios said she used a business plan for about two years. When she and a partner first launched the gallery in 2003, they developed the plan to divide the workload. Now operating alone, Rios said she assesses problems individually.  Her current business goals include attracting more clients and turning them into collectors, she said.

To maintain a profitable business portfolio, Rios offers lower-cost items such as coffee mugs for $18, mouse pads for $13, iPad cases for $56 and skateboard decks for $135 through an account on Zazzle.com. Over time, she hopes customers will come back for her more expensive digital art and photography.

By combining several arts ventures, Rios has been able to keep both feet where she wants them — in the art world.

“If I can pay my bills, then I’m happy because that allows me to stay here and do what I love,” she said. “Do I see myself being rich? No, but I can see myself being financially stable.”

Saturday, February, 26th, 2011

Dear Reader,

Today was an amazing day to witness in the life of a start-up educational institution: The Institute for Arts Entrepreneurship.

Today was our very first interview/audition day for The IAE.  Our faculty met prospective students for the first year of our two year program, which will begin on Sept 21, 2011.  Faculty members Joyce Thomas, Reid Hyams, Creative Enterprise Microfinance funder, Dan Abbate and I gathered together, to interview and audition our very first applicants.

So who is applying? Our  applicants ranged in age literally from 20 something to 50 something. This first batch came from theater, fashion, the culinary and visual arts,  interior design and dance.  Each came with different levels of entrepreneurial ability, and a variety of different reasons for wanting to lead an independent life as an artist. What they all shared with us, and each other today, was their ideas, and passion and determination to succeed.

Today The IAE became alive and real: to students, faculty, and especially to me. And what stood out clearly to me, in particular, is how great the need is for the training program The IAE is creating. Every single applicant, in their own way, expressed how rich and important the training we will offer to them is to their growth and development to sustain themselves in the field.

Birthing a business is a lot, I think, like birthing a child. We have ideas about what our kids will look like, how they will act, and what they will say and do when they are in the womb. But it is yet another entirely different reality to actually SEE how they look, SEE how they act and experience their CAPACITY!

In my minds eye I have always thought our demographic was very diverse in age and talent. Our applicants are proving this to be true in every way. The reality of this makes me hungry to meet the next batch and to make the melting pot even bigger. This dream I have had, and all my hard work over the past four years, is awaking my life through its entry into reality. What a great milestone every start-up seeks to reach and every entrepreneur yearns to know.

What’s your ETA to entrepreneur your art?

The NEA’s, Rocco Landsman, certainly struck a nerve with his blog post  Supply and Demand. A number of interesting posts have since been written about the topic, three in particular, which I would like to share with you. Two are by Diane Ragsdale, a scholar studying the economics of nonprofit regional theaters – and Landesman’s interviewer. The other by Arlene Goldbard a writer, speaker, activist, and consultant at the intersection of culture, politics, and spirituality.

I would encourage you to read these posts and think about what’s at stake for you and the arts and where you stand. The obvious problem is the  expansion of nonprofit arts groups when resources and audiences are in retreat. Landsman based his position on statistics by the advocacy group Americans for the Arts as well as the NEA: In the recession years of 2007 to 2009, the nationwide ranks of nonprofit arts organizations had grown by 3,000. At the same time, Landsman says, a 2008 NEA survey of public participation in the arts showed a 5 percent drop from 2002 in the number of adults who had visited an art museum or attended a live performance.

The Washington Post, February 13th, 2011 offers a good summary of the debate.

I’ve been following the responses to Rocco’s ‘decreasing supply‘ comment and his subsequent post on the NEA blog. Some believe that supply/demand is the wrong framework through which to look at the sector; some that there is no such thing as too much art and that we should increase patronage rather than ‘kill’ organizations; some agree with him but believe it was inappropriate for him to make the statement; and a few seem to agree with his points and believe that it was beneficial for him to make them. I’m in the last group.

Rocco has done the arts sector a service with his ‘decreasing supply’ comment as I think it has created an opening for a candid discussion about an elephant in the room: the US lacks a mechanism for identifying and dealing with mission-failing arts organizations and (because competition for resources exists) the nonprofit arts sector might be healthier overall if some mission-failing organizations were to close. Following on my overstocked arts pond post of a few weeks ago, here are some further thoughts on the supply/demand issue.

Competition among arts organizations for earned and contributed income exists. Some markets and organizations experience more competition than others, but it is not uncommon for arts groups located in the same city to be competing to secure patronage and trustees from among the same (narrow) demographic of upper middle class well educated arts-goers and funds from one or two government agencies and a small number of private foundations and corporations.

Many arts people take the stance that we should ‘let 1,000 flowers bloom’. While one might theoretically argue that there is no such thing as ‘too much art in the world’, the same cannot be said of arts organizations: to the degree that resources are not growing at the same rate as organizations (and they are not according to the most recent National Arts Index report), every new firm that enters the sector reduces the chances of every other to secure sufficient resources to operate.

(Read the rest of her post here.)

What is a mission-failing arts org? Like its opposite, perhaps you know it when you see it.
Diane Ragsdale wrote this blog post on February 13, 2011

In last week’s post I suggested that the sector might be strengthened if some ‘mission-failing’ organizations were to close. I defined mission-failing organizations as those that were not providing sufficient cultural or social value relative to the investments in them. It’s an awkward phrase and I find it difficult to describe a mission-failing organization with any confidence; however, I can give an example of its opposite–an organization that is providing great cultural and social value–and did so in a talk I gave in 2010 called The Excellence Barrier.

Here’s what I said (additional comments follow the excerpt):

Susan Sontag once wrote, “Existence is no more than the precarious attainment of relevance in an intensely mobile flux of past, present, and future.”  I take particular note of the phrase, “precarious attainment of relevance.”  No organization can be granted relevance in perpetuity based on the size of its endowment, the permanence of the building it occupies, the fact that it was the first or largest of its kind in its region or city, or its historic accomplishments.  The institution exists to matter to people, in a particular community, today.  That is the impact that must be assessed.

What does impact look like if not the metrics we’re currently assessing?  Alan Brown has done terrific work in assessing intrinsic impacts and community engagement, and I couldn’t begin to summarize his research here—but I suggest you take a look at it.   I would, however, describe what I consider to be one of the best examples in the US of an organization that is brokering relationships between people and art.

In 2003, choreographer Elizabeth Streb opened a performance space in the Williamsburg neighborhood of Brooklyn, N.Y. called S.L.A.M. Instead of creating a church-like space that patrons visited once a week for a sacred experience, Streb opened the doors and let people come in anytime to watch rehearsal or use the restroom. She added popcorn and cotton candy machines and let people walk around and eat food during the performances.

(Read the rest of her post here..)

As an artist, you certainly already have one or two specialties: playing the violin, contact improvisation, charcoal drawing, Shakespearean theatre.  But no matter how skilled you are in these types of areas, you are likely just a small fish in a large ocean competing to be noticed. For those desiring more work and opportunity, imagine how your career might be transformed if you had a powerhouse topic.

A powerhouse topic is a subject on which you become known as a local, national, or international expert.  This is accomplished through blogging, writing books, offering presentations, releasing videos, consulting, becoming a media expert, or other activities that clearly establish you as an authority.

The number of ways in which a powerhouse topic can transform your life is astonishing:

• Your expertise can lead directly to numerous professional opportunities: presentations, workshops, residencies, key note speeches, classes, media coverage, books, consulting work.
• Those opportunities can add, perhaps significantly, to your income.
• Your presentations around the powerhouse topic often lead—directly or indirectly—to additional work in your primary area(s).  For example, perhaps someone who sees your talk is so impressed by the way you interact with the audience that they book your group for a concert. 
• As an established authority, your network will increase appreciably, often with people trying to connect to you (instead of the other way around).
• Being an expert in a particular area impacts the way you approach your art.
• Having a powerhouse topic will keep you motivated and growing as a lifelong learner.

 Not all subjects have the potential to reach powerhouse proportions.  A topic will only help you significantly if the following conditions are met:

1. Passion.  You will spend a lot of time close to this topic, so be sure you’re passionate about it.
2. Relevance.  People should be interested in your topic.  Become the leading scholar on the Breviarium de Musica by Frutolfus of Michelsberg (12^th Century) might be fascinating, but probably won’t get you far.  As sad as it may be, not many people care.
3. Problem solving.  The best topics help solve real problems.  That’s why people will be interested in your message.
4. Not overcrowded.  If there are already mountains of experts on the topic, look elsewhere.  Standing out will be tough.  The secret is discovering a field that people truly care about (or could be compelled to care about), but there is a dearth of specialists.
5. Niche. Your message should be directed specifically towards a kind of audience: trombonists, private teachers, arts administrators, college students.  To quote a friend who is a serial entrepreneur, “find the biggest, littlest niche possible.”
6. Unique.  Your take on the issue should be somehow different and thought provoking.  Develop your own personal theories.
7. Communication. Only messages that are communicated clearly, accessibly, and in a way that connects with others will prove helpful.

Keeping these points in mind, brainstorm possible subjects that could work for you.  The best ones are specific but broad, with the possibility of digging deep.  Here are some general categories of powerhouse topics possible for musicians:

• Physical wellness (injury prevention, yoga for musicians, lifelong performance)
• The psychology of performance (conquering stage fright, finding spirituality through art, overcoming creative blocks) 
• Artistic techniques (fiddling for non-fiddlers, dancing in rhythm, how to practice, improvisational theatre games)
• Art history (Beethoven string quartets, jazz traditions for dummies, Russian choreography, why old plays matter today)
• Producing events (multi-media events, staging for musicians, crafting cohesive events, engaging new audiences)
• Teacher training (arts integration, group lessons, teaching improvisation to non-improvisers)
• Career skills (entrepreneurship, social media for artists, personal finance for artists)
• Life skills (time management, setting goals, becoming an artist-leader)

Most artists don’t even consider the possibility of a powerhouse topic.  But imagine the potential.  It may just be the key to the next door of your career.

So what’s your topic?

David Cutler is the author of “THE SAVVY MUSICIAN: Earning a Living, Building a Career, & Making a Difference.”

Americans for the Arts released its second annual National Arts Index scores last week. The National Arts Index is an annual measure of the health and vitality of arts in the U.S.  The Index score for 2009 is 97.7, down 3.6 percentage points from 101.3 in 2008. A score of 103.9 would bring the Index back to its highest point. 97.7 is the lowest index score in twelve years. Do you think its time for the arts to become taught and trained as an entrepreneurial pursuit?

Here is a summary of their findings:

• There were 3,000 new nonprofit arts organizations created during the 2007-09 recession years but attendance at mainstream arts organizations and events continues a long-term decline.
• In 2008, 41% of nonprofit arts groups reported a deficit to the IRS, up from 36% in 2007.

While our country’s flagging economy has surely presented a number of challenges for the arts, the Index does hit some resonating high notes:

1. Americans are seeking more personal engagement in the arts. Personal arts creation and volunteerism is growing. The number of Americans who personally participated in an artistic activity increased 5% between 2005 and 2009, while volunteering also jumped 11.6 percent.
2. The number of artists in the workforce has increased 17% from 1996 to 2009 (1.9 to 2.2 million).
3. Demand for Arts Education is up. There are more college-bound seniors with 4 years of arts or music and in the past decade college arts degrees conferred annually have risen from 75,000 to 127,000.

What does this mean for your community? Comment below about how you see personal arts creation and volunteerism growing in your community or tell us about arts programs that are innovative in building audience demand. And be sure to visit the National Arts Index page.

Check out our new video created for The IAE by Heather Hollaway from Cooper Leigh Productions. Heather just launched her own business by the way. We are proud to be one of her first clients. How about you? Are you ready? The IAE’s early bird application deadline is a week from today. Still time to apply! Our biggest scholarships will be given to early applicants.

Written by: Jeffrey Nytch, http://www.jeffreynytch.com/
DMA Director, Entrepreneurship Center for Music
University of Colorado – Boulder

In the 18 months since my arrival in Boulder to run The University of Colorado’s Entrepreneurship Center for Music (“ECM”), I’ve witnessed a number of sessions in which students are asked about the entrepreneurial ideas they are developing. It often takes some encouragement: students are wary of tipping their hands and having someone steal their idea away from them. And while in some situations that might be a legitimate concern (some sort of proprietary technology, for instance), most of the time I’m able to tell them, Look: your idea is much more than just a notion – it’s an authentic expression of you, borne out of your passion, your interests, and your experience. And that means that you’re the only one who can shepherd this thing through to completion.

And then I talk about teamwork. While some entrepreneurial ventures are fulfilled with the work of a single individual, in most cases the process is more likely to succeed when a team is involved. Nobody can be an expert in everything, and most entrepreneurial ventures require a very wide range of skills; there’s the creative idea process, but there’s also fiscal management, taxes, legal issues, marketing, and a host of other areas where somebody else might be more effective. An entrepreneurial venture of any complexity at all takes a team, and for a team to be effective there has to be an openness, a willingness to share our needs and seek help from others. It takes a certain kind of vulnerability.

I got thinking about this because I’ve been to a lot of conferences lately. Being a teacher of entrepreneurship in the field of higher education is an interesting combination: theory can be divorced of practice, and sometimes educators think that entrepreneurship is some sort of magic bullet, some sort of end in itself that they can plug into their curricula and guarantee the success of their students. As someone with an advanced degree (but not in entrepreneurship – I’m a composer), and one who learned entrepreneurship “on the street” (i.e., through trial and lots of error!), I can appreciate both the joy of pure scholarship and the limits of it, and am often the one in the room to gently explain that entrepreneurship is about process, that one best learns it by practicing, and that programs to implement it within an educational context can be a varied as the institutions themselves. Sometimes I’m heard, and sometimes it can be a frustrating conversation.

But one really positive thing that I’ve experienced at these conferences is the sense of teamwork embodied by my colleagues in entrepreneurship education. We share not only an interest in entrepreneurship and its potentially powerful impact on arts education, we also share a passion for our students and for equipping them to go out into the world and find their dreams. There is a tremendous generosity of spirit with these folks, a willingness to share their insights and innovations, to seek out knowledge from each other when we lack it ourselves, and to work together to solve our shared challenges. There is, in essence, a community of higher ed arts entrepreneurs – a community I am both honored and greatly blessed to be a part of.

I write about this, though, not just to express gratitude for that community but also because it’s a great illustration of an important aspect of entrepreneurship itself: the necessity of collaboration and teamwork in order to accomplish shared goals. Because entrepreneurship is more than just the idea. In fact, an idea in and of itself isn’t entrepreneurial at all. Entrepreneurship is the process by which an idea is brought to fruition, and it’s a process that is greatly facilitated by teamwork and collaboration.

I don’t need to look very far to see how this idea plays out, either: my own program in Boulder may be directed by me, but it’s a product of my predecessors, who laid important groundwork in establishing the program, my colleagues at CU, who partner with me to promote our programming and aid with their expertise, and this community of arts entrepreneurs nationwide, whose wisdom and whose own successes inform so many others beyond their institutions. In February, the ECM will be bringing Lisa Canning out to Boulder as our Spring Keynote Guest, and once again this community will be in evidence: as Lisa shares her wisdom and experience with the CU community, I’m sure she and I will also be talking about her ventures and, just possibly, she’ll take home with her some tidbits of her own. That’s the nature of community, of collaboration: the mutual exchange of ideas for the edification of all. It’s also a key component of entrepreneurship – and one I particularly enjoy reveling in.

This past week I have been thinking a lot about tipping points in the arts and how they may be about to set into motion a seismic shift of sweeping change.

By definition, a Tipping Point is the moment of critical mass, the threshold, the boiling point.

It seems, three different boiling points concurrently are emerging in the arts. As I see it, these three can best be described through the lenses of physics, sociology and climatology.

In physics, a tipping point is the point at which an object is displaced from a state of stable equilibrium into a new, different state. The arts have been experiencing a growing displacement from a stable state into an extremely unstable one. The creation of You Tube, Facebook, itunes, Reality Television, and the Kindle and the Nook alone are replacing the need for live performance, the need for face to face interaction, diluting the value of music down from the purchase of “an album” to a .99 cent download, destroying quality art and cultural programing on television and transforming the publishing industry. And the list goes on.

And yet, I believe the instability and raging impact of the destabilization of the arts, much like the impact of deregulation to many industries, has lead us to another tipping point through the lens of sociology. In sociology a tipping point occurs when an event, which was considered previously a rare phenomenon, becomes dramatically more common. The arts are so routinely viewed as unstable that it has become a commonly held belief that they will never be the same and the only constant is change. Ben Cameron speaks eloquently to this very point as do Ken Robinson, Richard Florida, Dan Pink and others trying to respond with ways to create a new kind of stability- a new kind of normal.

My response has been to focus on arts entrepreneurship. And look at all the arts entrepreneurship courses and workshops springing up? Every day I get a google alert around the key words arts entrepreneurship. 4 years ago the alert generated more or less one a week, 3 years ago there was a few a week, 2 years ago there were several a week and today I receive a list of at least 25.

So, can we stabilize all this massive change and uncertainty into a stable state again? And to do this, does it require a seismic shift to create a new center for calm to exist? Is it even possible ever again to achieve?

I believe, to accomplish this requires a tipping point in climatology. This is the point in which the “global climate” changes irreversibly from one state to a new state.

Climatology to the arts, seems like the most important tipping point because it will produce a new stable global climate built on a broad base of consensus from funding sources as to what will support its creation and evolution.

And indeed this final tipping point has too recently begun to tip. Funding not for profits is tipping from charitable donating to investing. This tipping point, as it grows, will irreversibly alter our thinking (as well as vocabulary and actions) about how funders think about who we are and what they want us to accomplish with their funds. In the past, people were “donors” and their money was given as a charitable gift or contribution. Today, people invest (rather than donate) their philanthropic dollars. Consequently, this global climate shift is creating investors in the arts who are looking for the greatest return on their investment. This was clearly illustrated at this years Grantmakers in the Arts Conference, where Joi Ito, Creative Commons, delivered the lead keynote for the conference on how venture capital relates to grantmaking in the arts, and what lessons can be learned from VC’s habits of mind and the investments they make.

In fact, I believe it may be this tipping point of climatology, in combination with physics and sociology, that might be creating “the perfect storm” to lead us right now into a seismic shift for the arts.

On the 31st of January, The IAE will be meeting in Washington with folks from State Department, The Aspen Institute, Americans for The Arts, The Beckman Institute for Interdisciplinary Research and The University of Illinois School of Art+Design to discuss how to set in motion the mission/vision statement of The IAE. While no one organization alone can transform the arts, the powerful impact of this team could be seismic.