The 2009-2010 school year has hit its stride, and Americans for the Arts has given parents, educators, administrators and students five days of arts in education focused blog entries from leading experts in the field. This elite field of bloggers includes Wolf Trap's own Mimi Flaherty Willis, our Senior Director for Education. Mimi offers a three part entry titled "The Arts Education Constituency Spectrum, where she discusses the necessity for broadening arts education programs and advocacy outside the confines of the K-12 demographic, particularly into the pre-k and post-high school age groups. She advocates that if we limit ourselves in scope, "we miss the big compelling picture and the larger message."
She goes on to discuss her work here at Wolf Trap as head of our Institute for Early Learning Through the Arts and our Internship Program, and the impact we strive to make upon each distinct age group. I implore you to read each entry; they are concise, informative, and engaging.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Friday, September 25, 2009
Friday Sampler
If you're looking for some good music to help you cruise through the rest of this dreary Friday, check out this Austin City Limits Festival Sampler available for free via iTunes. It's an interesting, eclectic mix of artists scheduled to appear at the festival next week. Some great tracks on there...standouts to me are "Fables" by The Dodos, "The Ark," by Dr. Dog (I love them,) "Wavin' Flag" by K'naan, and "On the Water" by the Walkmen. As a minor digression, the Walkmen put on an incendiary live show, so if they're coming to a city near you, an evening with them is well worth your $15.
Enjoy your weekend!
Enjoy your weekend!
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
The Problem with Non(profit) by Seth Godin
If you work for or operate a non-profit, take a moment to reflect on your penchant for, or aversion to change as a CEO, mid-level, or entry-level employee by reading this very powerful entry from one of the most iconic men in the marketing world today. I've also pasted his entry below.
I'd also encourage you to subscribe to his posts via email or RSS. He's a visionary in his field, and has helped lead me down certain paths of thought which have really paid dividends in my work and my everyday life.
Key excerpt -
"The marketing world has changed completely. So has the environment for philanthropic giving. So have the attitudes of a new generation of philanthropists. But if you look at the biggest charities in the country, you couldn't tell. Because they're 'non' first, change second."
The problem with non
Non as in non-profit.
The first issue is the way you describe yourself. I know what you’re not but what are you?
Did you start or join this non-profit because of the non part? I doubt it. It's because you want to make change. The way the world is just isn't right or good enough for you... there's an emergency or an injustice or an opportunity and you want to make change.
These organizations exist solely to make change. That's why you joined, isn't it?
The problem facing your group, ironically, is the resistance to the very thing you are setting out to do. Non-profits, in my experience, abhor change.
Take a look at the top 100 twitter users in terms of followers. Remember, this is a free tool, one that people use to focus attention and galvanize action. What? None of them are non-profits. Not one as far as I can tell. Is the work you're doing not important enough to follow, or is it (and I'm betting it is) paralysis in decision making in the face of change? Is there too much bureaucracy or too much fear to tell a compelling story in a transparent way?
Beth has a great post about the feeling of vertigo that non-profits get when they move from the firm ground of the tried and true to the anti-gravity that comes from leaping into change.
Where are the big charities, the urgent charities, the famous charities that face such timely needs and are in a hurry to make change? Very few of them have bothered to show up in a big way. The problem is same as the twitter resistance: The internet represents a change. It's easy to buy more stamps and do more direct mail, scary to use a new technique.
Of course, some folks, like charity: Water are stepping into the void and raising millions of dollars as a result. They're not a necessarily a better cause, they're just more passionate about making change.
A few years ago I met with two (very famous) non-profits to discuss permission marketing and online fundraising and how they might have an impact. Each time, the president of the group was in the room. After about forty five minutes, the meetings devolved into endless lists of why any change at all in the way things were was absolutely impossible. Everyone looked to the president of the group for leadership, and when he didn't say anything, they dissembled, stalled and evaded. Every barrier was insurmountable, every element of the status quo was cast in stone. The president of the group was (he thought) helpless.
When was the last time you had an interaction with a non-profit (there's that word again) that blew you away?
Please don't tell me it's about a lack of resources. The opportunities online are basically free, and if you don't have a ton of volunteers happy to help you, then you're not working on something important enough. The only reason not to turn this over to hordes of crowds eager to help you is that it means giving up total control and bureaucracy. Which is scary because it leads to change.
If you spend any time reading marketing blogs, you'll find thousands of case studies of small (and large) innovative businesses that are shaking things up and making things happen. And not enough of these stories are about non-profits. If your non-profit isn't acting with as much energy and guts as it takes to get funded in Silicon Valley or featured on Digg, then you're failing in your duty to make change.
The marketing world has changed completely. So has the environment for philanthropic giving. So have the attitudes of a new generation of philanthropists. But if you look at the biggest charities in the country, you couldn't tell. Because they're 'non' first, change second.
Sorry if I sound upset, but I am. The work these groups do is too important (and the people who work for them are too talented) to waste this opportunity because you are paralyzed in fear.
I'd also encourage you to subscribe to his posts via email or RSS. He's a visionary in his field, and has helped lead me down certain paths of thought which have really paid dividends in my work and my everyday life.
Key excerpt -
"The marketing world has changed completely. So has the environment for philanthropic giving. So have the attitudes of a new generation of philanthropists. But if you look at the biggest charities in the country, you couldn't tell. Because they're 'non' first, change second."
The problem with non
Non as in non-profit.
The first issue is the way you describe yourself. I know what you’re not but what are you?
Did you start or join this non-profit because of the non part? I doubt it. It's because you want to make change. The way the world is just isn't right or good enough for you... there's an emergency or an injustice or an opportunity and you want to make change.
These organizations exist solely to make change. That's why you joined, isn't it?
The problem facing your group, ironically, is the resistance to the very thing you are setting out to do. Non-profits, in my experience, abhor change.
Take a look at the top 100 twitter users in terms of followers. Remember, this is a free tool, one that people use to focus attention and galvanize action. What? None of them are non-profits. Not one as far as I can tell. Is the work you're doing not important enough to follow, or is it (and I'm betting it is) paralysis in decision making in the face of change? Is there too much bureaucracy or too much fear to tell a compelling story in a transparent way?
Beth has a great post about the feeling of vertigo that non-profits get when they move from the firm ground of the tried and true to the anti-gravity that comes from leaping into change.
Where are the big charities, the urgent charities, the famous charities that face such timely needs and are in a hurry to make change? Very few of them have bothered to show up in a big way. The problem is same as the twitter resistance: The internet represents a change. It's easy to buy more stamps and do more direct mail, scary to use a new technique.
Of course, some folks, like charity: Water are stepping into the void and raising millions of dollars as a result. They're not a necessarily a better cause, they're just more passionate about making change.
A few years ago I met with two (very famous) non-profits to discuss permission marketing and online fundraising and how they might have an impact. Each time, the president of the group was in the room. After about forty five minutes, the meetings devolved into endless lists of why any change at all in the way things were was absolutely impossible. Everyone looked to the president of the group for leadership, and when he didn't say anything, they dissembled, stalled and evaded. Every barrier was insurmountable, every element of the status quo was cast in stone. The president of the group was (he thought) helpless.
When was the last time you had an interaction with a non-profit (there's that word again) that blew you away?
Please don't tell me it's about a lack of resources. The opportunities online are basically free, and if you don't have a ton of volunteers happy to help you, then you're not working on something important enough. The only reason not to turn this over to hordes of crowds eager to help you is that it means giving up total control and bureaucracy. Which is scary because it leads to change.
If you spend any time reading marketing blogs, you'll find thousands of case studies of small (and large) innovative businesses that are shaking things up and making things happen. And not enough of these stories are about non-profits. If your non-profit isn't acting with as much energy and guts as it takes to get funded in Silicon Valley or featured on Digg, then you're failing in your duty to make change.
The marketing world has changed completely. So has the environment for philanthropic giving. So have the attitudes of a new generation of philanthropists. But if you look at the biggest charities in the country, you couldn't tell. Because they're 'non' first, change second.
Sorry if I sound upset, but I am. The work these groups do is too important (and the people who work for them are too talented) to waste this opportunity because you are paralyzed in fear.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
The Little Station that Could - 89.7 WTMD
Wilco, Death Cab for Cutie, Spoon, My Morning Jacket, Band of Horses, Talking Heads, Built to Spill, Mogwai, The National, and Mates of State. These are ten of my favorite bands, and all ten you can consistently hear on Towson University's member-supported, independent, commercial free semi-AAA station, or as WTMD reps put it, "community cultural clearinghouse for street-level arts activities built on new and interesting contemporary popular music."
It kills me that I can't regularly listen to this station since its frequency doesn't clearly permeate the D.C. radio waves, but every time I'm in Maryland, it becomes an immediate go-to. If you don't know much about this station and live/commute within the greater Baltimore area, I'd encourage you to tune into 89.7 for a top-notch indie listening experience. One of the most attractive aspects of this station is that they are very in tune with their listenership, soliciting advice on who/what to broadcast and keeping current on listener preferences. This is most clearly evidenced by their brilliant PR tactic called 'MixTape Thursdays," which consists of listener generated mix tapes that are played in succession every Thursday. You can listen from 9am – 7pm or check out mix tapes on WTMD's blog each Thursday.
It kills me that I can't regularly listen to this station since its frequency doesn't clearly permeate the D.C. radio waves, but every time I'm in Maryland, it becomes an immediate go-to. If you don't know much about this station and live/commute within the greater Baltimore area, I'd encourage you to tune into 89.7 for a top-notch indie listening experience. One of the most attractive aspects of this station is that they are very in tune with their listenership, soliciting advice on who/what to broadcast and keeping current on listener preferences. This is most clearly evidenced by their brilliant PR tactic called 'MixTape Thursdays," which consists of listener generated mix tapes that are played in succession every Thursday. You can listen from 9am – 7pm or check out mix tapes on WTMD's blog each Thursday.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
High School Musical and Wolf Trap Featured on Fox 5 This Morning
I'd just like to thank Fox5 and Holly Morris for spending the morning with us, helping to promote our upcoming seven show run of Disney's High School Musical. Two sets of cast members were featured during two live segments, which ran at 7:50 and 8:50am, respectively. There was also an 11:30 midday segment, which featured yours truly awkwardly running into the shot and talking up The Barns season and our education classes :) Opening night is in 50 minutes, so come on out! Your child will thank you, I promise, it's a great production, and a beautiful night! If you can't make opening night, the show is here all week, with 8pm performances through Sunday and weekend matinees at 2pm.
Check out the Fox5 morning show pieces via this link.
Check out the Fox5 morning show pieces via this link.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)