Looking to the Future

In reading Symphony Orchestra Organizations in the 21st Century, we were impressed with the longer term future perspectives of many members of the Institute's Board of Advisors and the correlative need for organization change within the community of symphony institutions. Below are presented some of the most incisive insights. If you haven’t yet read the complete report, click on the above title, and download and print the PDF file for more leisurely and comprehensive reading.                                                                                

Symphony organizations don’t want to change. Why would they? Who does?  Symphony organizations want circumstances to change so that they can go on doing what they have always done.                                     

***** 

Human nature work[s] against change. Change can be difficult. It exacerbates insecurities. It is the unknown, and many people are more comfortable with an unpleasant situation than with the unknown.                                               

*****  

. . . hierarchical organizations can develop so much institutional inertia that change becomes difficult or impossible even in the face of monumental challenges, which is why we have seen orchestras literally go out of business rather than change their ways of doing business.                                               

***** 

Crisis will continue to be the major force for change. ‘Man learns by being thrashed’ (Goethe, epigraph to Dichtung und Wahrheit ). At the same time, a very few model institutions will emerge and be everywhere emulated. The chief retardant to change will be the ability of many orchestral organizations to ‘muddle through,’ albeit barely.

***** 

If we continue to drag our heels in trying new things or don’t question how or why processes are being done certain ways, then we will change at a [very slow] rate.
The greatest threat to necessary, effective change is the routine of continuing to do things because “that’s the way we’ve always done them.” We cannot flourish, and may not even survive, if we only continue by doing the same things a little differently. Rather, we must seek to discover how we can do things with significant difference, and more significantly, what different things we can change.                                                 

***** 

Traditional stereotypes will . . . impede change. As long as people ‘think inside the box’ and perceive others in the old roles, little will change. Musicians must forget the grievances they carry from 10 or even 20 years ago and begin to take ownership in the institution. Staffs must lose their parochial attitudes towards musicians and perceive them as resources, even potential colleagues, working towards the same goal. Board members must foster these new relationships and get to know their orchestras’ musicians.

***** 

. . . boards that prove incapable of leading the crucial transitions [which are needed] will, in many cases, see their institutions die.

***** 

. . the organizational commitment to core purpose will be the principal factor for success or failure in the 21st century. If the structure of the organization hinders its ability to adapt, then success will be elusive. If, on the other hand, structure is flexible outside the framework of core purpose, then achieving success is possible.  

***** 

In order to be successful and sustainable in the future, our organizations will need to be able to serve our customers at a much faster rate.  The current need for instant information or access will become even more important.

***** 

. . . symphony organizations must adapt to the cultural and musical ecology of their particular communities, and that the larger the symphony organization, the more diverse range of products and services it will need to provide to its community.  This suggests that symphony orchestras will need versatile staffs of multitalented musicians and administrators.

***** 

. . . symphony organizations need to be aware of [new] technologies, vigilant, and willing to experiment with new musical products, offerings, and venues and embrace change as a core competency of the organization.                                         

***** 

Because technology is changing so rapidly, the organization must look for expertise wherever it exists. Tapping into the knowledge, contacts, special skills . . .of the musicians and board members will be imperative. The traditional structure of the staff managing, the board raising funds, and the musicians performing must be turned into a collaborative process. Everyone must be seen as a potential resource—musicians, community leaders, and so forth.

***** 

Historically, our organizations have been run in a very top down manner.  If one looks at industry, that model has and is changing, and I believe we need to make that change as well if we want healthy organizations.  In general, I think the environment will need to be much more collaborative in all areas, internal as well as external. Communications and flexibility will be very important as will be the ability to change without constantly causing upheaval.

***** 

. . .  the ability to encourage the board and orchestra to work as partners and owners of the institution will be critical to the long term success of orchestras. We can no longer leave it to the management to lead the orchestra and board. The management should be working for the board and orchestra as a manager works for an owner.

*****  

. . . hierarchical organizations can develop so much institutional inertia that change becomes difficult or impossible even in the face of monumental challenges, which is why we have seen orchestras literally go out of business rather than change their ways of doing business.                                                

***** 

Crisis will continue to be the major force for change. ‘Man learns by being thrashed’ (Goethe, epigraph to Dichtung und Wahrheit ). At the same time, a very few model institutions will emerge and be everywhere emulated. The chief retardant to change will be the ability of many orchestral organizations to ‘muddle through,’ albeit barely.

***** 

If we continue to drag our heels in trying new things or don’t question how or why processes are being done certain ways, then we will change at a [very slow] rate.
The greatest threat to necessary, effective change is the routine of continuing to do things because “that’s the way we’ve always done them.” We cannot flourish, and may not even survive, if we only continue by doing the same things a little differently. Rather, we must seek to discover how we can do things with significant difference, and more significantly, what different things we can change.                                                 

***** 

Traditional stereotypes will . . . impede change. As long as people ‘think inside the box’ and perceive others in the old roles, little will change. Musicians must forget the grievances they carry from 10 or even 20 years ago and begin to take ownership in the institution. Staffs must lose their parochial attitudes towards musicians and perceive them as resources, even potential colleagues, working towards the same goal. Board members must foster these new relationships and get to know their orchestras’ musicians.

***** 

. . . boards that prove incapable of leading the crucial transitions [which are needed] will, in many cases, see their institutions die.

***** 

. . the organizational commitment to core purpose will be the principal factor for success or failure in the 21st century. If the structure of the organization hinders its ability to adapt, then success will be elusive. If, on the other hand, structure is flexible outside the framework of core purpose, then achieving success is possible.  

***** 

In order to be successful and sustainable in the future, our organizations will need to be able to serve our customers at a much faster rate.  The current need for instant information or access will become even more important.

***** 

. . . symphony organizations must adapt to the cultural and musical ecology of their particular communities, and that the larger the symphony organization, the more diverse range of products and services it will need to provide to its community.  This suggests that symphony orchestras will need versatile staffs of multitalented musicians and administrators.

***** 

. . . symphony organizations need to be aware of [new] technologies, vigilant, and willing to experiment with new musical products, offerings, and venues and embrace change as a core competency of the organization.                                         

***** 

Because technology is changing so rapidly, the organization must look for expertise wherever it exists. Tapping into the knowledge, contacts, special skills . . .of the musicians and board members will be imperative. The traditional structure of the staff managing, the board raising funds, and the musicians performing must be turned into a collaborative process. Everyone must be seen as a potential resource—musicians, community leaders, and so forth.

***** 

Historically, our organizations have been run in a very top down manner.  If one looks at industry, that model has and is changing, and I believe we need to make that change as well if we want healthy organizations.  In general, I think the environment will need to be much more collaborative in all areas, internal as well as external. Communications and flexibility will be very important as will be the ability to change without constantly causing upheaval.

***** 

. . .  the ability to encourage the board and orchestra to work as partners and owners of the institution will be critical to the long term success of orchestras. We can no longer leave it to the management to lead the orchestra and board. The management should be working for the board and orchestra as a manager works for an owner.