When most communities suffer from an “oversaturation” of non-profit arts organisations trying to engage the same audience, Kelvin Dinkins Jr. asks if merging is the answer.
Are we facing a period in the arts sector where taking collective action will not only be innovative practice, but essential for the survival of struggling nonprofit arts organizations?
I’ve been thinking about this question in advance of the upcoming National Innovation Summit for Arts & Culture, which will feature six twelve-minute talks on “Taking Collective Action” from arts leaders across the country.
I believe that we’re in an era when most arts communities suffer from an oversaturation of nonprofit arts organizations vying for an audience’s time, attention and, most of all, their money. With each organization touting its merits, it has become increasingly difficult to distinguish one from the other especially, I would imagine, for donors and grant-making organizations. The struggle to keep a nonprofit afloat by keeping enough funders and audience members engaged year after year, with so many more technologically advanced outlets for entertainment, is taxing on arts organizations. In the end, it leaves the weaker ones behind and that much closer to the chopping block. The innovator in me struggles to reason why it would not be relatively simple, and beneficial, for arts organizations facing tough times to consider partnering/merging with another organization for a continued existence.
Are we facing a period in the arts sector where taking collective action will not only be innovative practice, but essential for the survival of struggling nonprofit arts organizations?
I’ve been thinking about this question in advance of the upcoming National Innovation Summit for Arts & Culture, which will feature six twelve-minute talks on “Taking Collective Action” from arts leaders across the country.
I believe that we’re in an era when most arts communities suffer from an oversaturation of nonprofit arts organizations vying for an audience’s time, attention and, most of all, their money. With each organization touting its merits, it has become increasingly difficult to distinguish one from the other especially, I would imagine, for donors and grant-making organizations. The struggle to keep a nonprofit afloat by keeping enough funders and audience members engaged year after year, with so many more technologically advanced outlets for entertainment, is taxing on arts organizations. In the end, it leaves the weaker ones behind and that much closer to the chopping block. The innovator in me struggles to reason why it would not be relatively simple, and beneficial, for arts organizations facing tough times to consider partnering/merging with another organization for a continued existence.