Tag: Zannie Giraud Voss

Joint Study on Gender Disparity in Art Museum Directorships Shows Gap Persists Despite Gains

Post author By Margaret Allen
Post date April 6, 2017
No Comments on Joint Study on Gender Disparity in Art Museum Directorships Shows Gap Persists Despite Gains

While incremental gains were observed, a new study shows that women still hold fewer than 50% of directorships, earn less than male counterparts, and typically lead institutions with smaller budgets

The Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD) and the National Center for Arts Research (NCAR) at Southern Methodist University in Dallas today released findings from the second iteration of their gender gap study, which was designed to deepen understanding of the gender disparity in art museum directorships to help AAMD member institutions advance towards greater gender equity.

Through a combination of quantitative analysis of 2016 data collected from AAMD member institutions and interviews with female museum directors and executive search consultants who specialize in recruitment for art museums, NCAR and AAMD researchers – led by Zannie Voss, director, NCAR, and Christine Anagnos, executive director, AAMD – examined the ongoing and historical factors of the gender gap in art museum directorships, and compared their findings to those of the previous study, conducted in 2013.

While incremental gains have been observed in the last three years, the study found that the gender gap persists: women still hold fewer than 50% of directorships and, on average, earn less than their male counterparts. The study also found that museum type and budget size were influential factors on representation and salary differentials.

In 2016, AAMD conducted a survey of its members, collecting data from 210 respondents that included each institution’s operating budget, endowment, the salary of the director (or top leader), the director’s gender, and the self-reported museum type (e.g. encyclopedic, contemporary, etc.). Of these 210 museums, 181 also participated in the 2013 survey, allowing for examination of trends. The study sought to answer three main questions: What is the current state of women in art museum directorships? How has the gender gap in art museum directorships shifted in the past three years? What are some factors that may drive the gender gap? The NCAR and AAMD study had several key findings:

While men continue to outnumber women in director roles, there has been a 5% increase in female directorships from 2013: women represented 48% of art museum directorships in 2016 (compared to 43% in 2013).
There are clear disparities in gender representation depending on operating budget size: the majority of museums with budgets of less than $15 million are run by a female, rather than a male, director. The reverse is true for museums with budgets of over $15 million, where female representation decreases as budget size increases.
Women are at a salary disadvantage: on average, female directors earned 73 cents for every dollar that male directors earned.
When segmented by operating budget, the gender disparities are more nuanced:

For museums with a budget of over $15 million—roughly the top quarter of museums—female directors earned 75 cents for every dollar a male earned, an improvement from 2013, when women earned only 70 cents per dollar earned by a man.
For the other three-quarters of member museums (those with budgets of less than $15 million), female directors on average earned 98 cents to every dollar earned by a man. This represents a reversal from three years ago, when female directors at these same museums earned an average of $1.01 for each dollar earned by their male counterparts.
Women hold the majority of directorships in College/University museums (60%) and Culturally Specific museums (57%). Men hold the majority of directorships at Single Artist (67%), Encyclopedic (59%) and Contemporary (54%) museums.
Museum types, which are also tied to budget size, also help reveal salary dynamics at play: some museum types with higher average budgets have less of a salary gap as compared to some museums with lower average budget size. The biggest pay disparity is at Encyclopedic museums, where female directors average only 69 cents for every $1 of their male counterparts, while the smallest gap is at Culturally Specific institutions, where women earn 91 cents for every dollar a male director earns.

Drawing from interviews with executive search consultants and female museum directors, the report also includes a qualitative analysis that examines the personal as well as the institutional barriers in achieving gender equality in the field. Overall, interviewees observed that while progress is incremental, the needle is moving, with changes accomplished through cultural shifts within the field and in broader society, and with the emergence of a new generation of leaders.

In addition to Voss and Anagnos, co-authors of the study are Veronica Treviño, SMU MA/MBA Class of 2017, and Alison D. Wade, Chief Administrator, Association of Art Museum Directors. The authors gratefully acknowledge and thank the members of the Association of Art Museum Directors and, specifically, the following art museum directors and executive search consultants for their perspective: Gretchen Dietrich (Utah Museum of Fine Arts), Madeleine Grynsztejn (Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago), Sarah James (Phillips Oppenheim), Laurie Nash (Russell Reynold Associates), Lisa Phillips (New Museum), Kimerly Rorschach (Seattle Art Museum), Sally M. Sterling (Spencer Stuart), and Belinda Tate (Kalamazoo Institute of Arts).

About AAMD
The Association of Art Museum Directors advances the profession by cultivating leadership capabilities of directors, advocating for the field, and fostering excellence in art museums. An agile, issues-driven organization, AAMD has three desired outcomes: engagement, leadership, and shared learning. Further information about AAMD’s professional practice guidelines and position papers is available at aamd.org.

About NCAR
In 2012, the Meadows School of the Arts and Cox School of Business at SMU launched the National Center for Arts Research (NCAR). The vision of NCAR is to act as a catalyst for the transformation and sustainability of the national arts and cultural community. The goals of the Center are to unlock insights on: 1) arts attendance and patronage; 2) understanding how managerial decisions, arts attendance, and patronage affect one another; and 3) fiscal trends and fiscal stability of the arts in the U.S., and to create an in-depth assessment of the industry that allows arts and cultural leaders to make more informed decisions and improve the health of their organizations. More information about NCAR and its reports, white papers, and tools can be found at smu.edu/artsresearch.

Tags Cox School of Business, Meadows School of the Arts, Zannie Giraud Voss

Culture, Society & Family Economics & Statistics Learning & Education Researcher news SMU In The News

New York Observer: Is Bigger Always More? How U.S. Museums Fared in 2016

Post author By Margaret Allen
Post date January 13, 2017
No Comments on New York Observer: Is Bigger Always More? How U.S. Museums Fared in 2016

The New York Observer newspaper relied on the expertise of Zannie Voss, director of SMU’s National Center for Arts Research (NCAR), for an article about how museums are faring at a time with tighter budgets, less revenue and an evolution in museum-going behavior.

Voss is chair and professor of arts management and arts entrepreneurship in the Meadows School of the Arts and the Cox School of Business at SMU. She has a worked as consultant on projects for the Irvine Foundation, the League of American Orchestras, Theatre Development Fund and Theatre Communications Group, co-authoring TCG’s Theatre Facts since 1998. She has published over a dozen articles in academic and practitioner journals on research examining the strategic factors that influence organizational performance in the arts using multiple stakeholder measures.

The Observer article, “Is Bigger Always More? How U.S. Museums Fared in 2016,” published Dec. 26, 2016.

Read the full story.

EXCERPT:

By Daniel Grant
Observer
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times? The Metropolitan Museum of Art set a new attendance record in fiscal year 2016, bringing in 6.7 million visitors, the fifth year in a row that more than six million people have come through the doors in a given year. However, the institution reported a $10 million general operating deficit, requiring it to institute a hiring freeze, lay off dozens of staffers and put on hold an addition to the Lila Acheson Wallace Wing.

This might be just an oddity, but other art museums have experienced financial troubles as well. The Museum of Modern Art has offered early retirement buy-outs for its older employees in order to trim its budget, and a $3 million deficit has compelled the Brooklyn Museum to offer its staff early retirement packages. The San Diego Museum of Contemporary Art, which is planning an expansion that will triple its exhibition space, is eliminating eight full-time and 20 part-time employees, and the Cincinnati Museum Center has cut 60 jobs in order to stem the flow of red ink while it prepares its own expansion.

“Museums are in a period of transition, as they are spending more on marketing … and attracting more people through new educational, digital and other programming while garnering less revenue per person who attends,” said Zannie Voss, director of the National Center for Arts Research at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. Spending by the average visitor has declined from $25.81 in 2012 to $17.52 in 2015, according to data from DataArts, one of NCAR’s partners, for more than 100 art museums around the country. Meanwhile, those same institutions have increased their programming by 67 percent, raising their costs while earning less per visitor.

“Museums are striving for larger and more diverse audiences, looking to increase accessibility and remove the economic barriers to visiting, and they are creating new programs to engage people,” Voss said. Program revenues and fundraising have not been keeping up, though, she said, noting that the costs of running the sampled museums have risen 10 percent above inflation and only trustee giving, at nine percent, has kept pace. Growth in the other principal sources of raising funds— through individuals, foundations, corporations and government grants—“have not been as robust and, in the case of individual giving, represent a decrease of seven percent in absolute dollars.”

Read the full story.

Tags Meadows School of the Arts, National Center for Arts Research, Zannie Giraud Voss

Culture, Society & Family

Six new cities added to the Top 20 lists of arts-vibrant cities in the U.S. — data-driven assessment ranks cities by arts and cultural assets

Post author By Margaret Allen
Post date March 29, 2016

SMU’s National Center for Arts Research (NCAR) releases Second Annual Arts Vibrancy Index

Double click to open and explore interactive heat map.

SMU’s National Center for Arts Research (NCAR) today released its second annual Arts Vibrancy Index, which ranks more than 900 communities across the country, examining the level of supply, demand, and government support for the arts in each city. This year, the report features six new communities, with three states – Hawaii, Oregon and Texas – appearing in the index for the first time. The new cities featured on the lists are Portland, Oregon; Austin, Texas; and Kansas City, Missouri, in the top 20 large cities list; and Maui, Hawaii; St. Cloud, Minnesota; and Medford, Oregon, in the top 20 small and medium cities list. NCAR provides rank scores on all measures for every U.S. county on its interactive heat map.

“Each community in the report has a unique story and cultural landscape – this report is designed to help us understand what makes a city vibrant in the arts and the different elements that come into play to foster that vibrancy,” said Zannie Giraud Voss director of NCAR, and chair and professor of arts management and arts entrepreneurship in SMU’s Meadows School of the Arts and Cox School of Business. “The data helps illustrate how vibrancy varies between cities and what arts vibrancy looks like for different communities around the nation.”

The overall index is composed of three dimensions. Supply is assessed by the total number of arts providers in the community, including the number of arts organizations, independent artists, and arts, culture, and entertainment employees. Demand is gauged by the total nonprofit arts dollars in the community, including program revenue, contributed revenue, total expenses, and total compensation. Lastly, the level of government support is based on state arts dollars and grants and federal arts dollars and grants.

Geographically, the rankings utilize Micro- and Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), which are delineated geographic areas consisting of one or more counties that have high social and economic integration with an urban core as defined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). By focusing on MSAs, the index captures the network of suburbs that rise up around a city or town rather than considering each separately. Where the OMB breaks down very large MSAs into Metropolitan Divisions, this report does, too.

Among cities with populations of 1 million or more, the five most vibrant arts communities are as follows:

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV
Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN
New York-Jersey City-White Plains, NY-NJ
San Francisco-Redwood City-South San Francisco, CA
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, CA

Portland, Oregon; Austin, Texas; and Kansas City, Missouri joined the top 20 list this year, ranked 17, 18, and 19, respectively. Compared to 2015, there was little movement between the highest-ranking cities in both the larger and smaller markets, and the top three cities remain the same as last year, with some repositioning between them. In the top five rankings among large cities, the biggest mover was Los Angeles, which moved up to fifth place from its position in ninth place last year; San Francisco moved up to fourth place (from fifth); and Boston dropped down two positions to sixth place.

For medium and small cities, with populations under 1 million, the top five cities are all in the West. Jackson, Wyoming, which ranked third in last year’s index, has moved to the top of the list from its former position in third place, causing Glenwood Springs, Colorado, and Santa Fe, New Mexico, to drop down one position to second and third respectively:

Jackson, WY-ID
Glenwood Springs, CO
Santa Fe, NM
Breckenridge, CO
Edwards, CO

Three new cities appear in the top 20 medium and small cities list: Maui, Hawaii; St. Cloud, Minnesota; and Medford, Oregon, ranked at 14, 16, and 20, respectively. The full top 20 lists are available on the NCAR website, including scores on each of the three dimensions (supply, demand, and government support).

Beyond the specific rankings, select key findings in the Arts Vibrancy Index include:

Every region of the country is represented on both lists: no region has cornered the market on arts vibrancy. Cities large and small from every region appear in the top 40 cities, although there is high representation from Western and Midwestern communities in the set of medium-small cities.
Arts vibrancy takes many shapes and forms. Some cities have impressive financial resources invested in nonprofit arts and cultural institutions, others are filled with many smaller organizations and venues, some are tourist destinations, and still others are artist colonies. Some cities are strong in numerous arts sectors while others are capitals of a particular art form.
Vibrancy in very large cities takes two distinct forms: some cities feature a strong concentration of arts vibrancy in the urban core with less happening in the surrounding areas, while others feature an even distribution of vibrancy across their metropolitan areas.
The majority of arts-vibrant cities have a population either under 300,000 or between 1,000,000 and 3,000,000.

About NCAR
In 2012, the Meadows School of the Arts and Cox School of Business at SMU launched the National Center for Arts Research (NCAR). The Center, the first of its kind in the nation, analyzes the largest database of arts research ever assembled; investigates important issues in arts management and patronage; and makes its findings available to arts leaders, funders, policymakers, researchers and the general public.

Follow SMUResearch.com on twitter at @smuresearch.

SMU is a nationally ranked private university in Dallas founded 100 years ago. Today, SMU enrolls nearly 11,000 students who benefit from the academic opportunities and international reach of seven degree-granting schools. For more information see www.smu.edu.

SMU has an uplink facility located on campus for live TV, radio, or online interviews. To speak with an SMU expert or book an SMU guest in the studio, call SMU News & Communications at 214-768-7650.

Tags Cox School of Business, Meadows School of the Arts, National Center for Arts Research, Zannie Giraud Voss

Culture, Society & Family Learning & Education Researcher news

National Center for Arts Research white paper counters findings of the Devos Institute Study on Culturally Specific Arts Organizations

Post author By Margaret Allen
Post date February 8, 2016

NCAR study identifies the key differences between culturally specific organizations and their mainstream peers and calls for a more equitable measurement of performance

The National Center for Arts Research (NCAR) at Southern Methodist University today released a white paper that examines the distinguishing characteristics of arts organizations that primarily serve Asian American, African American, and Hispanic/Latino communities.

The study is designed to provide insights, based on measurable data, about the operating contexts and unique challenges that these organizations face. Co-authored with Andrea Louie, Executive Director, Asian American Arts Alliance, and Zenetta Drew, Executive Director, Dallas Black Dance Theatre, the goal of the white paper is to provide a more nuanced understanding of culturally specific organizations and to help establish a more equitable measure of their performance.

Inspired by the DeVos Institute’s 2015 publication “Diversity in the Arts: The Past, Present and Future of African American and Latino Museums, Dance Companies, and Theater Companies,” NCAR’s paper responds to two key aspects of the DeVos Institute’s findings: first, that arts organizations of color are in general smaller and “far less secure” than their mainstream counterparts; and second, that funders might see greater results by providing larger grants to a smaller number of “effective” organizations, rather than continuing to fund a larger number of organizations through smaller grants.

Based on its research, NCAR found that culturally specific arts organizations are not disproportionately smaller than their mainstream peers. Taking into account their sector and age, the data shows that they are generally younger and therefore at a different stage in their evolution than mainstream organizations.

NCAR argues that the funding model proposed by DeVos would be detrimental to the cultural ecology, as it could effectively reduce the overall number of smaller organizations and therefore diminish the level of diversity, dynamism, and innovation in the field. NCAR calls for a deeper understanding of culturally specific organizations before significantly altering or abandoning their funding.

“We recognize that culturally specific organizations have particular characteristics that should be understood for what they are, neither good nor bad nor a sign of ineffectiveness but simply a different starting point,” said Zannie Voss, director at NCAR. “With this study, we want to reframe how we assess the performance of these organizations by identifying the differences in their operating contexts and by establishing a more precise framework of what expected performance should look like, rooted in evidence-based research.”

NCAR’s study examined the operating characteristics of arts organizations that primarily serve African Americans, Asian Americans, or Hispanics/Latinos as compared to their more mainstream counterparts, and examined whether they perform significantly differently on a variety of metrics. An analysis of data from a large sample of organizations across 12 different arts and culture sectors produced several other key findings:

Culturally specific organizations are more prevalent in sectors that have lower average budget size (e.g., community-based arts, arts education), and less prevalent in sectors with larger budgets (e.g., museums, opera companies, performing arts centers).
Culturally specific organizations have similarly sized budgets and physical facilities as mainstream organizations but spend less on marketing, earn less from subscriptions, and have lower trustee giving; however, they attract a higher level of support from government sources.

These organizations also demonstrate performance characteristics that distinguish them from one another (as well as their mainstream counterparts). More specifically:

Asian American organizations generate more attendance using fewer resources but also attract a lower level of support from all sources except for government.
African American organizations tend to have fewer programmatic offerings that generate lower annual attendance and program revenue but more contributed revenue, especially from individuals, foundations and corporations.
Hispanic/Latino organizations tend to have a higher number of programmatic offerings, full-time employees, and development expenses, which generate higher overall contributed support, especially from corporations and foundations, but lower program revenue and lower individual giving.

In order to create the level playing field it seeks to establish, NCAR’s study controlled for a number of factors:

Inherent differences within the arts and culture sector; e.g., data shows that art museums have higher attendance rates than do dance companies.

Organizational characteristics, especially fundamental characteristics that are difficult to change in the short term but can influence performance attributes of an organization, such as size of the physical facility and organizational age.

The characteristics of the community where the organizations operate; e.g., New York City has a larger population with higher average income and tourist visits than most U.S. cities, but also more competition for arts and culture consumers.

“Diversity in the arts is a multifaceted and complex issue. As an academic institution that seeks to educate future leaders in the arts, we are proud to make this contribution to the broader field discussion on diversity,” said Sam Holland, dean of the Meadows School of the Arts at SMU. “NCAR was established to catalyze new and informed thinking about important issues in the arts with a data-driven approach. It is our hope that the compelling insights set out by this study will help support the sustainability of a dynamic and diverse arts and cultural community around the country.”

Tags Meadows School of the Arts, National Center for Arts Research, Sam Holland, Zannie Giraud Voss

Culture, Society & Family Economics & Statistics

Data-driven assessment ranks U.S. Metropolitan Areas by arts and cultural assets

Post author By Margaret Allen
Post date January 29, 2015

NCAR, SMU’s National Center for Arts Research, creates index to measure arts vibrancy of U.S. Metropolitan Areas

NCAR, SMU’s National Center for Arts Research, today released its first annual Arts Vibrancy Index.

The index ranks more than 900 communities across the country. Vibrancy is measured as the level of supply, demand and government support for arts and culture on a per capita basis. The report highlights the top 20 large markets and top 20 medium and small markets. NCAR provides rank scores on all measures for every U.S. county on the interactive heat map.

“The numbers are only the start of the story, not the end. Each city in our report is unique in what makes it a vibrant community for the arts,” said Zannie Giraud Voss, director of NCAR and chair and professor of arts management and arts entrepreneurship in SMU’s Meadows School of the Arts and Cox School of Business. “Our intention in developing this report is to stimulate conversation about what makes a city vibrant in the arts and how arts vibrancy varies across cities.”

The overall index is composed of three dimensions.

Supply is assessed by the total number of arts providers in the community, including the number of independent artists, arts, culture and entertainment employees, and arts organizations.

Demand is gauged by the total nonprofit arts dollars in the community, including program revenue, contributed revenue, total expenses and total compensation.

Level of government support is based on state arts dollars and grants and federal arts dollars and grants.

girls, virtual reality, say no, sexual violence, assertiveness training, Rowe, Jouriles, McDonald, SMU

supervolcano, fossil, Italy, James Quick, Sesia Valley

Meltzer, contraception, couples, happiness

Morrison Formation, Jurassic, climate, ancient soil, Myers, paleosols

Geographically, the rankings utilize Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), which are delineated geographic areas consisting of one or more counties that have high social and economic integration with an urban core as defined by the Office of Management and Budget. By focusing on MSAs, the index captures the network of suburbs that rise up around a city or town rather than considering them separately.

Among cities with populations of 1 million or more, the five most vibrant arts communities are as follows:

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, D.C.-Virginia-Maryland-West Virginia
Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro-Franklin, Tennessee
New York-Jersey City-White Plains, New York-New Jersey
Boston, Massachusetts
San Francisco-Redwood City-South San Francisco, California

For medium and small cities, with population under 1 million, the top five cities are all in the West:

Glenwood Springs, Colorado
Santa Fe, New Mexico
Jackson, Wyoming-Idaho
Breckenridge, Colorado
Edwards, Colorado

The full top-20 lists are available on the NCAR Arts Vibrancy Index, including scores on each of the three dimensions of supply, demand and government support.

Beyond the specific rankings, select key findings in the Arts Vibrancy Index include:

No region has cornered the market on arts vibrancy. Cities large and small from every region appear in the top 40 cities, although there is high representation from Western communities in the set of Medium-Small cities.

Arts vibrancy takes many shapes and forms. Some cities have impressive financial resources invested in nonprofit arts and cultural institutions, others are filled with many smaller organizations and venues, some are tourist destinations and still others are artist colonies. Some cities are strong in numerous arts sectors while others are capitals of a particular art form.

There are interesting differences across very large Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs). Those that made the list tend either to have a strong concentration of arts vibrancy in an urban core and less going on in surrounding communities, or they are vibrant throughout the greater metropolitan area, and less so in the city center.

The majority of arts vibrant cities have a population either under 300,000 or between 1,000,000 and 3,000,000.

In 2012, Meadows and Cox launched NCAR, the first of its kind in the nation. NCAR analyzes the largest database of arts research ever assembled, investigates important issues in arts management and patronage, and makes its findings available to arts leaders, funders, policymakers, researchers and the general public.

With data from the Cultural Data Project (CDP) and other national and government sources such as the Theatre Communications Group, the National Endowment for the Arts, the Census Bureau and the National Center for Charitable Statistics, NCAR is creating the most complete picture of the health of the arts sector in the U.S.

The project’s indices and dashboard were created in partnership with IBM, TRG Arts and Nonprofit Finance Fund. The Center also partnered with the Boston Consulting Group to develop its mission, vision and long-term strategies.

NCAR is led by Zannie Voss and Glenn Voss, Endowed Professor of Marketing at Cox.

Meadows, one of the foremost arts education institutions in the United States, offers undergraduate and graduate degrees in advertising, art, art history, arts management and arts entrepreneurship, communication studies, creative computation, dance, film and media arts, journalism, music and theatre.

Cox offers a full range of undergraduate and graduate business education programs.

Follow SMUResearch.com on twitter at @smuresearch.

SMU has an uplink facility located on campus for live TV, radio, or online interviews. To speak with an SMU expert or book an SMU guest in the studio, call SMU News & Communications at 214-768-7650.

Tags Cox School of Business, Meadows School of the Arts, National Center for Arts Research, Zannie Giraud Voss