Great Expectations Interview with Jim Collins

My aunt recently sent me Great Expectations, an article from the July/August issue of Symphony Magazine. This article featured an interview with Jim Collins highlighting "how his ideas about excellence in business can extend to the... arts." Jim Collins is the author of Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap... and Others Don't. He has extended his focus in Good to Great and the Social Sectors by examining how non-profits can aspire to greatness using his ideas presented in Good to Great without purporting that "the primary path to greatness in the social sectors is to become 'more like a business.'" Two particularly interesting points were raised in this article.

1.) The social sectors are not built upon the same economic symmetry as businesses are because in business "money is both an input and an output. It's both a means of success and a definition of success." The nonprofits have a different spin on things because "money is only an input and not an output" and is thusly not the main factor for determining success. In the social sector, the measure of success varies from organization to organization but can be better understood in terms of the number of lives touched or improved upon and the ability to educate and push people's boundaries. Collins recognizes these differences, stating that "Business thinking is not the answer, and I want to give business people and social-sector people a common language around the principles of greatness... Whether we call them business or not is the wrong question."

2.) The interview went on to explore how success can be measured in goals attained, but raised an especially interesting point when examining leadership in non-profits. Two studies were cited, one of which "revealed that three out of four executive directors of nonprofits planned to leave their jobs" and the other examined people poised to become executive directors, finding that "the majority said they're not interested in number-one jobs." Various reasons were cited for this, including overwork, boards, fundraising difficulties and overall stress, but the fact remained that the result was a lack of strong leadership and that many leaders took those roles because of their passions for the causes undertaken.

Collins pointed out that, unlike in businesses where "great companies develop their leaders within and move them into positions of responsibility," many non-profits are not doing so and are thusly "not only facing a scarcity of leadership... also facing the search problem." He questions "Why do we not invest enough in thinking about who inside could grow into leadership?" He also questions why there isn't "a West Point for developing leaders for arts organizations?" Lack of leadership is a huge problem faced by many groups and, as those in leadership positions start to feel their passions wearing thin due to the above-cited reasons, there are simply not enough people to take their places.

Some organizations are founded on an idea of rotating leadership, such as the Women's Caucus for Art, and new leaders are trained by those who had served in such positions creating a rotating cycle of leadership. This requires that new leaders be willing to step up to the plate, but offers them some training before they are thrust into the leadership role. Other such opportunities are offered through various programs, such as the Community Arts Training (CAT) Institute offered through Regional Arts Commission (RAC). So there are efforts being made to create and educate new and potential leaders.

All in all the article was a thought-provoking read and has gotten me interested in reading the books. How the social sectors operate and the problems faced by non-profits are large influences on the art world as a whole that affect all of us in the arts to a very large extent, especially those who see art as acting as a catalyst for social change.