iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Richard Dare

GET UPDATES FROM Richard Dare
 

Paradise Lost: Can We Keep Nonprofits From Failing?

Posted: 04/ 5/2012 2:25 pm

On my first day in the nonprofit world, I was introduced as "the new suit." Short shrift indeed for the years I'd spent undergoing rigorous formal musical training. My decades of hard-won success in the for-profit sector, it seemed, had marked me with a sort taint in certain corners of the art world -- had made me seem somehow less artistically chaste than I had been considered in my younger days. After all, I must have sold out by choosing to create companies rather than compositions over the intervening span of years. And now here I was suggesting we, as artists, ought to figure out a better way to pay for what we do. What nerve. What gall.

Here were my instructions, the day I arrived: "You are to pursue a group of well-heeled funders -- patrons as they're called in the art world -- and hope they give us bundles of cash so we can do our thing." That was pretty much it. That was, in essence, the sum total of the business plan with which I was presented.

And this little arrangement presumably would remain hunky-dory so long as we took pains never to alienate our sugar daddies. But under this regime, I speculated, one is not really in the art business anymore, is one? No, the beggar ultimately acts primarily upon the impulse to satisfy his patrons -- or better yet, has a staff to do that for him. And so, I wondered, what are we all going to do when we eventually recognize we've constructed a gilded trap for ourselves by this practice?

2012-04-04-willpaintforfood.jpg


The Sound of a Thousand Terrible Things

Everywhere we look, we see signs of current and impending collapse in the nonprofit sector. Using my own industry (if that word is not too offensive) as a lens, consider the state of the American orchestra: This past year saw six major bankruptcies and closures amongst orchestras. Seventy-three percent of all orchestras surveyed by Yale University this year are straining under significant and growing deficits. That alone should give you a chill. If it doesn't, reread it. The 18 percent that are breaking even are primarily doing so by cutting programming and other costs to the bone -- at the expense of their missions, one might at least worry. Naturally, there are wonderfully positive exceptions to this situation, and they are cause for celebration. But the grimmest of news is, I'm afraid, an undeniable macro trend.

A popular analysis I read recently concluded that the current proliferation of nonprofit failures in America is the result of continuing fallout from the 2008 financial (housing) crisis. The result of the recent economic downturn? You must be joking.

It's the result of more than 100 years of ignoring the mathematical realities about the ways in which economics works because the methods we were using appeared to work for other reasons entirely. It's not a downturn. It's a predictable systems collapse. And I assure you the coming years will likely be warrant and license for -- and enticement to -- an ever increasing abandonment of nonprofit support by wealthy patrons, corporate philanthropists and, eventually, even dedicated foundations that will lead to a bloodbath of nonprofit failures unless we undertake fundamental structural reform of the nonprofit business model itself, and unless we do so quickly.

Extrapolating further from the Yale research, we can conclude that if an orchestra performs in about the top 10 percent of all fund-raising development departments nationwide, it will only close about 45 percent of the growing cost gap each year henceforth. The math is against us, folks. The reactor core is overheating. The ground beneath us is quaking. At least, it certainly is for orchestras, and I suspect very strong similarities exist amongst other nonprofit sectors outside of art as well.

The Underlying Problem

So what are we going to about this? What about all our piddling "development" plans now? Are we supposed to simply tell our workers to stalk the wealthy ever more fiercely until we have cannibalized all the supporting resources away from our fellow nonprofit organizations? And should we who sit in America, the cradle of entrepreneurship, who have seen how sustainable businesses actually work, expect that some clever marketing gimmick here or some little tweak to the business model there is going to solve this problem? Please.

No, our problem is this: The underlying business model of the nonprofit is too inadequate, and the need for our services is too fast-growing, and society's understanding of the situation isn't all that it might be. And we're afraid to say the word "business" in the same sentence as the word "art" for fear of alienating both our artists and their supporters. And we're afraid to admit we have a problem and so we close our eyes and try to believe in an irrational business plan that is so stupid and so inadequate that any first year entrepreneur can -- and all young MBA students do as you can plainly tell by their questions -- see right through it. And I think it should be -- this nonprofit modus operandi of relentless begging -- treated with great suspicion and indeed contempt. And I think we ought to fix it if we really believe in art and music and education and feeding the homeless and all the other nonprofit pursuits as much as we claim we do.

Now, the traditional nonprofit business model makes quite large claims for itself, doesn't it? It says it "protects" our artists from the rough and tumble of the real world out there. It prevents them from being influenced by money. It maintains the purity of our missions and lets us operate without being swayed by financial concerns. It says that the means by which we "raise funds" in the nonprofit world is to be accepted as a sort of divine revelation, unalterable, and that those who do not accede to this business model are almost certainly infidels, outsiders or at least threats to peace and quiet.

Nonsense. I tell you what -- I don't think the nonprofit model works well enough at all anymore. I really don't believe it does. For all the blather about how much money doesn't (and shouldn't) matter to our missions, most nonprofits are more or less entirely consumed by the relentless task of doing little other than pursuing the almighty dollar.

Building a Bridge to Somewhere

Donated funds are an excellent bridge, of course, and a vital one for new ideas to get started in nonprofits, to incubate them before they're fully grown up. It makes perfect sense for us to fully support things we think are important but which do not yet have a known business model or which we want to keep away from the influence of money during the development stages, and to do so with no expectation of a financial return. To do less than that would be inhumane. But even donated funds need to be a bridge to a sustainable place where we earn our own unrestricted revenue, not just a bridge to nowhere.

And the likelihood that I'm right in suggesting we need some new thinking here -- as opposed to the likelihood that a system full of good intentions but sporting an absolutely dreadful track record of maintaining financial viability -- I think puts me much more near the position of being objectively correct, as painful as that may be to any of us.

Where are our priorities, ladies and gentlemen? We are giving away what's most precious in our society. And we're giving it away without a fight. Every day we see arts and other nonprofit organizations lose funding like a naive gambler loses bets against a shrewd bookie. And those of us who run arts organizations feel the pressure like a vice throttling our ability to serve society ever more forcefully with each passing season. And yet we praise very the people who want to deny us the right to act rationally for fear they'll criticize our artistic or intellectual or emotional integrity if we point out the elephant in the room. The nonprofit business model is badly broken and it needs to be fixed. Shame on us while we accept this state of affairs. The work of nonprofits is too important to society's well being for us to accept such a Mephistophelean compact.

In the weeks ahead, I'll explore with you some of the ideas that seem to be working, and some that don't. We'll consider the challenges and opportunities nonprofits face in all their beauty as well as in full view of their warts. I warn you in advance, however, some parts of this journey may not be pretty. So viewer discretion is advised. That said, I believe as a community, we can develop a more successful model of supporting the things we hold so dear, and which sustain our souls as a people. Entrepreneurship must become a partner to mission-driven nonprofits, not a feared enemy, not an ignored resource. The next step in our evolution may require new forms of partnership, innovation, and testing of blended models, to help us find the optimal formula for success in our own time. That being the case, we should be putting our best minds on this now because it's quite important. It's a necessary component of art and history and education and society. Together, I believe we can meet this challenge. What do you say?

(Picture used by kind permission of Lucy Pass, Little Lost Soul. "Will Paint for Food". 2011. Oil on canvas. Private collection: Lancaster, England).

 
On my first day in the nonprofit world, I was introduced as "the new suit." Short shrift indeed for the years I'd spent undergoing rigorous formal musical training. My decades of hard-won success in t...
On my first day in the nonprofit world, I was introduced as "the new suit." Short shrift indeed for the years I'd spent undergoing rigorous formal musical training. My decades of hard-won success in t...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 35
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
12:06 PM on 05/04/2012
No offense to those who have led before me in the field - but this entire article is correct, but it is changing with each new graduate. I'm a few years out of college and manage a small arts nonprofit organization in a somewhat rural/metropolitan city. When I look around at my colleagues of the same generation, we're not looking at the arts and nonprofits the same as our predecessors. We do not see the arts as a product, but rather as a tool for our community. We see that we fit within the community in which we serve -- we are not the defining quality of that community. The elitism that is bred in conservatories and narrow-minded large arts organizations is what is killing this industry. We do need to look at our business model - but we don't necessarily have to change it, we just have to look at it a different way. If your organization is solely about the "art", then you shouldn't be a nonprofit. If your organization is focused on impacting the community in a beneficial way through the arts, then you're on the right path.
11:06 AM on 04/13/2012
I will follow this with great interest. Richard, did you mention that you were trained as a composer? Then you know that the symphony orchestra does not have, in my opinion, a healthy relationship with the idea of serving the need for innovation in our society. Also, I live in an area in the country that supports the highest number of co-ops, co-ops of all kinds, not just the crunchy type. Perhaps art management could learn something from this type of relationship between producers and consumers of any product and services. William Neil, TheComposerStudio.Com
02:58 AM on 04/11/2012
Thank you, thank you. The Non-Profit Arts have been leading on their knees for too many years now. Business people by-and-large can't relate to us, and who can blame them?

Time to grow up, and move out of our parent's basement.
05:45 PM on 04/10/2012
Agreed. We must rethink how we go about our respective non-profit businesses. Creative thinking and an entrepreneurial spirit must be as central to our business model as they are to imagining and realizing great art that is relevant to the communities we serve.
11:35 AM on 04/10/2012
I am an entrepreneur and have also served on the boards of several non-profits (arts and other). Each needed the same thing: to be brought up to speed with traditional business board operations and some serious re-thinking about what it is to be a non-profit. Each also relied heavily on private donors and were reluctant to branch into new, more creative forms of fund-raising and marketing. There is a crucial need for exactly what you say: entrepreneurial creative thinking. But the problem is layers deep and has been building for a very long time. From cultural apathy to stale marketing, lack of arts education, and our current political clime, non-profits are viewed as unnecessary expenditures. Until we can engage people regarding the need and value of non-profits, they will continue to falter and fail. Basic rule of business: Fill a need and demonstrate value before you ask for money.
Great and much-needed article - thank you!
08:23 AM on 04/10/2012
Some interesting thoughts that aggregate a lot of thinking from others. For an excellent piece of original thinking on these issues, readers should take a look at the article in the GIA reader by Adrian Ellis (Grantmakers in the Arts Website) and also look at Alan Brown's work on audience engagement. Richard Dare deserves credit for highlighting research that deserves more conversation, such as the Flannagan report.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Richard Dare
CEO and Managing Director, Brooklyn Philharmonic;
03:10 PM on 04/10/2012
Many thanks for your comment, RYWTaylor.

The Adrian Ellis GIA Reader article I believe you are suggesting, "Some Reflections on the Relationship between Supply and Demand in the Formalized Arts Sector" may be found online here for any interested readers:

http://www.giarts.org/article/some-reflections-relationship-between-supply-and-demand-formalized-arts-sector

Ellis also wrote an earlier article titled "The Changing Place of the 501(c)(3)" which reveals additonal thinking on the topic. That second one can be found here:

http://www.giarts.org/article/changing-place-501c3

Being new to the field, I hadn't read either, so am grateful to you for pointing them out. Both were excellent and thought provoking.

Separately, I think the Alan Brown research you also mentioned is noted in an earlier bit of the discussion SparkOC and I were having a bit lower on the page in the Comments section, so I won't re-link to it here. It's also well worth reading.
08:44 PM on 04/09/2012
I am having a hard time listening to someone who heads a symphony lecture me about nonprofits and the future. Symphonies, those monstrously expensive entities created by the Western Europeans, need more money than you can imagine to continue and their combined deficits are in the billions of dollars. When you get to your "warts" I hope we get full disclosure about orchestras. I am in a different end of the nonprofit world, still the arts, but the more creative, community-based end where artist and community are seriously engaged in a survival dialogue. We are looking for new "best practices" measures and we are banding together to survive. I hope that you write about a broad spectrum of the nonprofit world because it is as diverse as the world itself. The artist is at the center of my world and the artist hold the secret to our survival.
07:47 PM on 04/09/2012
I'm not sure it is the model that is the only reason. I have seen plenty of non-profits work quite well. I think it is the attitudes that need changing. Some non-profits work hard at obtaining money and work equally hard at carrying out their missions. However, there are some non-profits that expect to be funded (the way it used to be) and are not putting in the work to achieve their funding goals. I have seen fantastic boards, and I have seen lazy boards, and this goes for the staff as well. When a non-profit has the right people working for them, people that are actually doing their jobs (board, staff, volunteers included), the team spirit can carry them to success in all aspects of their business model. Yes, I may be unpopular with this view point, but I am not sure the model is completely to blame when I see some successful non-profits doing quite well, even in this economy.
11:04 PM on 04/08/2012
Love it. Incendiary. Looking forward to hearing more.
09:34 AM on 04/08/2012
In the case of orchestras, there is always the idea of raising more money from people who might contribute small amounts of money. I thought abount making an extra contribution with my subscription order. But then I learned that our local orchestra pays its part time music director several hundred thousand dollars a year. I concluded that my money isn't really needed if a journeyman conductor/music director is being paid this much, while the musicians have to become unionized to achieve decent salaries.
11:36 PM on 04/07/2012
I look forward to reading the ideas you'll present in the weeks ahead. "Entrepreneurship must become a partner to mission-driven nonprofits, not a feared enemy, not an ignored resource." Couldn't agree more with that statement. This article also makes me wonder about arts work on an individual, micro level...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:34 PM on 04/07/2012
Richard - Thank you for this insightful article. I co-founded a for-profit performance group, Blind Ear Music, simply because my partner and I found the non-profit route to be a ridiculous structural model. As a conservatory graduate with an MM in composition, I have had to learn everything about operating an LLC on my own. Musicians in conservatories should be taught the value and the art of entrepreneurship. It is just as essential to the survival of our craft as is good technique and ear training.
06:37 PM on 04/07/2012
Hi there, great article. I think I know you from many years ago. Any chance you were involved in education in Southern California?
photo
Nancy Roberts
GreenMBA and Care2 Blogger
01:43 PM on 04/07/2012
I'd say you're setting up a straw man; plenty of for-profit businesses are struggling, too.. A plethora of arts organizations have been exploring different aspects of the business model (and are not shy of talking about business and product) for decades. Please don't give the anti-non-profiters any more ammunition than they already have. And yes, I have an MBA. :)
01:32 PM on 04/07/2012
Of course, "Entrepreneurship must become a partner to mission-driven nonprofits, not a feared enemy, not an ignored resource." There's been a movement toward this conceptually for a decade or so in the academy and more recently in practice. Community partnerships, with-profit models, audience co-creation and co-curation are just a few entrepreneurial ideas that are out there. Looking forward to reading about your additions.
For more, see: http://creativeinfrastructure.org/2012/01/09/kerrys-question/ and http://blog.entrepreneurthearts.com/2009/12/25/avoiding-the-begging-cup/
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Richard Dare
CEO and Managing Director, Brooklyn Philharmonic;
02:55 PM on 04/07/2012
Thanks for your comment, LindaInPhoenix.

The two links you suggest in your comment above are very interesting, and I also recommend them for anyone joining the conversation. They include some good ideas set within interesting case studies.