Drum roll, please…

Given the options, we think the concept of a set of regional events offers us the best mix of the desired outcomes, accessibility, time to deliver, and efficient use of NAS resources. It gives people the benefits of an in-person event, without the drawbacks and barriers to a large, national event. We also see it as a good foundation to help people get connected before jumping online.

The vision:

• Participants from across the country will have the opportunity to attend a one day session at no cost with other future executives from their region.
• They will work with leading faculty to develop skills that will not only benefit them in their current positions, but will help position them for future leadership roles.
• They will engage with their peers from throughout the region and across disciplines through discussions and activities, giving them a stronger bond than a simple networking event.
• We’ll use online tools to extend the regional events, helping participants continue building relationships with the people they meet and those who participate at other sites.

What do you think?  Would you want to participate?

Who’s got the control?

One of the big questions for us is figuring out the appropriate level of organization (employer) involvement or investment.  We know that potential participants are interested in having support from their organizations in their professional development, which can happen in a variety of forms:

• Monetary invest money in the form of sponsorship or tuition
• Involvement in decision about participation (nomination process)
• Providing participants with time “on the clock” to participate

It turns out this question leads us to two more  fundamental questions:

A few things to think about…

The more people toss around ideas about what could develop for the Future Leadership Program, the more it is clear that there is no single factor that is going to dominate the design process.  As we sort out our thoughts and the data from the survey, these are some of the questions bouncing around our office:

• What is the role of current/future employers in the process – who are we responsive to in determining the content?  Who is expected to make an investment and in what form? Who should make decisions about participation?
• What should the format be – it doesn’t seem feasible to do a large, multi-day event right now so what are the options?  Can people take the time and make the investment to travel?
• How do we prioritize the content areas that have been identified – should the focus be on hard skills (for example understanding financial management, effective use technology), soft skills (such as networking or effective team management) or both?  What are the most effective ways to develop or teach each? Can we make the content relevant for current roles and helpful for moving into executive roles?

Survey Results Part 6: Barriers to Learning

There were three leading barriers to taking part in ongoing professional development and learning: competing demands on individual’s time, the challenge of balancing demands at work and at home, and cost. The time and financial investment required introduce a unique challenge for these professionals. Respondents felt that it was often difficult to assess whether an opportunity would be worth their time and money before taking part in the learning. Designing a solution to these barriers is essential if people are to commit to these programs over the longer term.

Survey Results Part 8: Responses to Questions Ten through Seventeen

We do not have permission from the survey respondents to share the raw data, however we hope the following summary will provide additional material for discussion. As you will see, the survey sample is small and the range of responses are therefore only suggestive of the complete picture for the next cohort of leaders in arts and culture. We reviewed the data in light of our experience working with and talking with cultural professionals over the last several years, and took note of data that matched our prior experiences, and also the data that did not. We hope you will add your thoughts to help fill in the picture and help identify critical areas for more comprehensive research.