ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS FOR SUCCESSFUL CO-LEADERSHIP IN NON-PROFIT THEATRE BY ARIN D. SULLIVAN SPRING 2012 THESIS Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Master of Science in Arts Administration Drexel University By Arin D. Sullivan, B.A. * * * * * Drexel University 2012 ii Copyright by Arin Sullivan 2012 ABSTRACT The organizational charts of nonprofit professional regional theatres are dominated by a dual or co-leadership structure consisting of an artistic and administrative leader. While conflict within this leadership couple can have far- reaching effects on organizational performance, little guidance has been provided for the artists and managers embarking on this arranged marriage. Through an examination organizational behavior and human resources literature describing the dual leadership relationship in nonprofit theatre in combination with an examination of literature related to CEO/COO partnerships as well as team or group leadership texts, Successful co-leadership teams have in common four essential characteristics: a shared essential mission, a foundation of respect and trust, constant and meaningful communication, and an extended engagement. These characteristics should be considered carefully in forming co- leadership partnerships. DEDICATION ii Dedicated to my co-leader for this lifetime, Andrea Taylor, to whom I send all of my love, trust and respect. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Throughout my career, I have been very lucky to be surrounded by successful theatre professionals who have been willing to take me under their wings. When the time comes, I hope that I have the grace to demonstrate an equal generosity of spirit when an annoying know-it-all next sits in front of me with lots of questions and even more opinions. I would especially like to thank Marge Betley, my friend and mentor, who suffered more interruptions than most, and who inspired this thesis during many late night conversations about the world as we would run it. I would also like to thank Cecelia Fitzgibbon who gently, and then not so gently, nudged me to finally sit down and start writing. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................................. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ v LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... vi INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1 CO-LEADERSHIP IN NONPROFIT PROFESSIONAL THEATRE ............................................ 3 FOR-PROFIT LEADERSHIP DUOS ................................................................................................ 6 LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................................................... 7 CONFLICT ......................................................................................................................................... 10 ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS FOR SUCCESSFUL SHARED LEADERSHIP .......................... 13 Shared Mission, Vision and Goals .............................................................................................. 13 Respect and Trust ........................................................................................................................ 16 Communication ........................................................................................................................... 18 An Extended Engagement ........................................................................................................... 20 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................... 22 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................... 23 SOURCES CITED .............................................................................................................................. 28 v LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: CURRENT LEADERSHIP AT LORT THEATRES ........................................................................ 24 FIGURE 2: THE LEADERSHIP TRIANGLE ................................................................................................. 27 vi "In my consulting experiences, I have heard many board members lament the concerns of the ‘two-headed monster’ in reference to the artistic director and managing director.” – Jom Volz1 "Tensions are to be expected and worked through, always remembering that while theatre is a business, its business is art, not business." -- Zelda Fichandler2 INTRODUCTION The organizational charts of nonprofit professional regional theatres are dominated by a dual or co-leadership structure consisting of an artistic and administrative leader (see Figure 1). While conflict within this leadership couple can have far-reaching effects on organizational performance (Voss, Cable, and Voss 2006), little guidance has been provided for the artists and managers embarking on this arranged marriage (Gronn, P., 1999; Mehta, Z., 2003). In order to inform the formation and maintenance of successful co-leadership partnerships in nonprofit professional theatre, it is helpful to examine of the available literature focusing on nonprofit theatre, previously documented interviews with artistic and managing directors, as well as to examine literature in the fields of 1 Jim Volz, How to Run a Theater: A Witty, Practical and Fun Guide to Arts Management (New York: Back Stage Books, 2004). 2 Zelda Fichandler, "Whither (Or Wither) Art?" in American Theatre Reader: Essays and Conversations from American Theatre Magazine, ed. American Theatre Magazine Staff (New York, NY, USA: Theatre Communications Group, 2009), 262. 1 organizational behavior and human resources. This examination yields four characteristics common to successful co-leadership relationships: shared mission, mutual trust and respect, constant communication, and an extended engagement. 2 CO-LEADERSHIP IN NONPROFIT PROFESSIONAL THEATRE In the second half of the 20th Century, a series of financial incentives led to a rapid growth in the number of theatres in the United States. In 1962 the Ford Foundation began to provide major operating support for performing arts organizations, including millions of dollars granted to fledgling resident theatre companies outside of New York City, much of it in the form of matching grants in order to recruit new donors . Following Ford’s leadership, hundreds of foundations and corporations became active supporters of the arts (McCarthy and others 2001). In 1965, the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) was inaugurated and the federal government began to provide direct support to the arts. McDaniel and Thorn (1992) liken this convergence of funding opportunities to a “cultural big bang” wherein a great number of organizations were formed rapidly and without the time to organically develop organizational structures. Instead, these new theatres borrowed the key elements of their structures from other nonprofit performing arts organizations such as symphony orchestras, thus becoming structurally isomorphic (Peterson 1986; McNeil 2009; Meyer and Rowan 1977). Isomorphism brings with it language and labels, which are used to demonstrate commonality with other like organizations and to give the organization instant legitimacy in its nascent stages (Meyer and Rowan 1977). 3 The co-leadership structure was further reinforced by the 1965 Rockefeller Brothers Fund report “The Performing Arts: Problems and Prospects” (1965). In this report, the panel strongly recommends that nonprofit performing arts organizations have a business professional in a leadership role, writing “Indeed, there is no reason why the business operations of a nonprofit organization should not be as expertly managed as those of any profit-seeking organization.” Co-leadership has been described as a balanced partnership, providing what Volz calls “checks and balances” lending to the credibility of the institution (2004, pg. 25). Gronn (1999, pg. 2) describes formal and informal “leadership couples” as a “neglected substitute for the single handed leader” and Miles and Watkins (2007, pg. 4) discuss an executive team in which the members exploit their distinct strengths – what they call “complementarity.” They describe a leadership team in which the complementary strengths of each member both compensate for the shortcomings of the other team member and “results in a team in which the whole is much greater than the sum of the parts." According to de Voogt (2006), arts organizations must have two leaders as it is nearly impossible to combine the required artistic and business skills required to lead an arts organization in one person. Finally, theatre is, at its very core, a collaborative art form. The artistic director/managing director partnership may also be an outgrowth of that collaborative spirit (Caust 2010). 4 Whether as a form of isomorphism, in reaction to the recommendations of the funding community, to position a complete and balanced skill-set at the top, or as an outgrowth of the collaborative spirit inherent to the creation