Music and MLA: The Value of Artistic Training

This month, I’d like to share my reflections on the value of artistic training in terms of its contributions to management and leadership ability.

Drucker used the symphony orchestra as a model of one type of team. In a 1992 Wall Street Journal article titled “There’s More Than One Kind of Team,” Drucker examines the American obsession with “team building.” As he notes, there is more than one type of team. One of these types is the “football team,” a metaphor he extends to a symphony orchestra: “In the football team or the symphony orchestra, there is no…permissiveness. The word of the coach or the conductor is law. Players are beholden to this one boss alone for their orders, their rewards, their appraisals, their promotions” (Drucker, 1992, p. 3). If you will allow me, I’d like to expand on this a bit, as I’ve had experience as a member of a symphony orchestra, as well as other musical “teams.”

Drucker has a point. The conductor is in charge of tempo, dynamics, and other aspects of interpretation. But even he or she is beholden to a higher authority: the musical score. The conductor cannot simply decide to take an Allegro movement half tempo! So, while the conductor may lay down the law, he or she cannot simply operate on whim or momentary inspiration. Rehearsals involve communicating a plan, a mission and vision, for playing a given piece. What are the tempos (speed) at which each movement will be played? What kind of mood do we want to convey? What interpretation do we bring to this piece? If the conductor decides to deviate from the mission and vision in a performance, this is enormously disruptive to performers who have rehearsed a program with a specific goal in mind.

The conductor is thus the CEO, the leader who sets the tone and conveys the mission and vision with clarity. Consistency is key in terms of interpretation and execution. Yes, a given solo moment for a player (the French horn solo) allows the instrumentalist to express herself individually, at which point the conductor gives the individual considerable liberty to perform. But, in terms of keeping the group together and aligned, the conductor is the leader who establishes clarity (Drucker, 2008, p. 434). And the leader is beholden to the mission and vision (the score): the larger goals of the organization rather than the personal desires of the leader himself.

So, Drucker is right in the sense that the conductor operates as a bit of a dictator. However, there is an entire underlying network of leadership that coexists with the conductor’s “rule of law.” While the conductor is the CEO, there is an entire subsidiary leadership network of players in the form of section leaders. Symphony section leaders have remarkable authority over their respective players (particularly, of course, the concertmaster). Most conductors will not dictate bowing directions for string players, but this is a crucial responsibility of the section leader to ensure appropriate articulation and tone. Wind players are more individualistic, often with one player on a part (first flute, second trumpet, etc.) but they need to make sure that they are working together as a group to blend their sound, articulate notes the same way (short, long, or in between) and maintain perfect intonation. Section leadership, therefore, often requires translating the communication from the conductor (especially if the conductor is not a specialist in that instrument, which is usually the case) to the rest of the section. Finally, the section as a whole must make sure that they are always an effective part of the whole orchestra, in the fore when important to the music, in the background when not. And most of all, players must blend their sound so that nobody stands out individually unless it is required.

Section leadership teaches people to work as a team, not just with people who play the same instrument but with others in the orchestra. Good section leaders check in with each other by groups; the woodwinds, brass, and strings each think of themselves as a team. The principal viola is concerned about making her section sound its best, but she is also in non-verbal communication with the principal cellist, principal second violinist, and concertmaster to make sure that the larger team is in sync. The smaller wind and brass sections can do this more naturally as they have fewer players and an easier to manage team. In a top-class symphony orchestra, everyone’s ears are hearing everything, adjusting pitch, note length, tone quality, and other aspects to make the most harmonious sound possible.

Section leaders are always in touch with what is going on with the larger group and communicating with their team what needs to happen so that the group effort (adherence to mission and vision) is the best it can be. Sometimes it involves direct instruction (mandating bow direction for the section) and at other times it involves more subtle direction (drop your volume level down here so you can hear the clarinet). Section leaders are your team leaders who are flexible, able to pivot and respond to change, lead the group through challenges and towards high achievement. They are aware of the group dynamics around them in an organization, but don’t call attention to problems. They merely adjust and make their contribution better given what is happening in the moment. The worst thing a section leader can do is to take the position that “My section is right and everyone else is wrong!” A lack of flexibility musically means that nobody is adjusting to pitch changes, or musical expression, or the inevitable spontaneous moments of live music. If something unexpected happens, you have to go with the change, not fight it. If the soprano soloist decides to come in early, you’d better join her!

We’ve been talking about orchestral musician skills. These are very different leadership skills than those required of, say, a string quartet player, who must play with more authority and projection, and who must react constantly to the other players in a conversation. This is what Drucker refers to as the “tennis doubles team…the sort of team that plays in a jazz combo…the team that is most likely to produce a genuine innovation like the personal computer…years ago” (Drucker, 1992, p. 2). A small chamber ensemble requires each player to “own” his or her part (play so that the individual is heard and present) but allow a conversation to take place among the players. At times, the flute will have the dominant part. Yet, for fleeting moments, the viola might have something important to interject, and the others need to back off and listen to that statement. In faster movements, there is usually a player or players who function as the timekeepers. They set the tempo, and make sure that things are moving along at a steady pace – nobody is rushing or lagging behind. The intimacy of a small ensemble like this requires that everyone be present at all times as an individual, but also be aware of the flow of the musical conversation, which can be very rapid at times! In a given passage, each instrument can have something important to say, and everyone needs to know when to speak out and when to listen. Chamber music ensembles have been likened to a marriage. If there is any breakdown in communication, the relationship suffers enormously.

You may have worked on small team projects or in small groups and understand this dynamic. One weak player can sink the rest. If a string quartet has one performer not of the caliber of the others, it really shows, and drags everyone else down. It also isn’t always about performance. I’ve seen incredible performing groups have dysfunctional relationships related to personal dynamics. People in small groups need to get along personally and have a close bond and similar temperament. The “team of rivals” model of Lincoln and his cabinet does not work in such a small group. This is not to say that difference of opinion is not important in small groups. It is! But people need to feel safe and comfortable enough with each other to express dissenting ideas without retaliation. This is hard to do in a small group, where everyone is out in the open. Drucker posited that the “jazz combo” model of team required the most flexibility and stringent requirements (Drucker, 2008, p. 440).

This discussion shows that the value of the arts in leadership is yet another area where Peter Drucker was ahead of his time. Over the past several years, it has become quite fashionable for those in business and organizational management to look to the Arts for assistance in developing leadership abilities. The 2004 Davos World Economic Forum held a workshop titled “If an Artist Ran your Business.” The 2020 Davos Forum continued this theme with a presentation from Nico Daswani, who focused on the power of artists to influence change and shift discourse. Michael O’Malley published an August 24th, 2012 article in Harvard Business Review titled “Every Leader is an Artist.” In 2013, Kevin Daum published “4 Great Leadership Lessons from the Arts” in Inc.’s online magazine. The leadership skills he attributes to those in the visual and performing arts are:

• Ability to lead a project from start to finish;
  
• Capacity to manage dynamic people effectively;
  
• Ability to ensure total accountability; and
  
• Acumen in implementing big picture thinking.

I would add some other leadership qualities learned through the Arts to his list:

• Empathy and understanding of different types of people and cultures/approaches to situations (think of the collaborative nature of putting on/curating an art exhibit, for example, or presenting an opera, especially one involving performers/artists/composers from different cultures)
• Ability to visualize and communicate complex solutions or programs (not only seeing the “big picture” of a chamber music series, but also the logistical details of fundraising, rehearsal time and facilities, etc.)
  
• Comfort with both the long term and short term needs of the creative process (looking ahead to not just what art speaks to today’s audience, but what might have relevance and value for generations to come – in other words, thinking through the role of discontinuity and continuity in the creative process)
  
• Crisis management (as in a performance situation, where there are inevitable “glitches” or changes in conditions to handle – that wardrobe item that has suddenly disappeared back stage)
  
• Perhaps most importantly: the broad impact of the Arts on shaping people’s sense of empathy, values, compassion, and understanding of the larger human condition – the shared emotions and stories that unite us regardless of culture (how do we deal with death or loss? Illness? War and conflict? Fear? Leadership needs leaders who understand that people are affected by these things and are not calculating, rational machines.)

So, I think the arts are a fertile training ground for all kinds of management and leadership skills that are crucial today. Working with different types of groups and teams (the orchestra, the section leader, or the jazz combo/chamber group). Managing projects and people. Cultural sensitivity and empathy. Seeing the big picture but also the details. Comfort with both long and short-term goals. Change leadership. If you are looking for your future leaders, I would highly recommend seeking those with a background in the arts. They have been in the trenches of all kinds of management situations, and are ready to take on your challenge.