Skip to main content

Artists and Managers as Executive Leaders of Arts Organizations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Kultur und Management

Abstract

This chapter is about artists and managers working in partnership as executive leaders in arts organizations. This dual structure has become common in many organizational contexts: cultural, nonprofit, professional partnerships, banks and many entrepreneurial start-ups, particularly in the high tech field. The practice of dual leadership has a long tradition in performing arts organizations in North America and is becoming more common in Germany, as well.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alvarez, J. L., & Svejenova, S. (2005). Sharing Executive Power. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Antrobus, C. (2009). Two heads are better than one: What art galleries and museums can learn from the joint leadership model in theatre. Unpublished manuscript, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Currie, G., Lockett, A., & Suhomlinova, O. (2009). The institutionalization of distributed leadership: A “Catch-22” in English public services. Human Relations, 62(11), 1735–1761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fayol, H. (1949). General and Industrial Management. London: Isaac Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fjellvaer, H. (2010). Dual and unitary leadership: Managing ambiguity in pluralistic organizations: Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaudreau, M. (2006). Réussir la cogestion: étude exploratoire sur le partage des rôles au sein des tandems de gestionnaires. Mémoire, HGC Montréal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazaille, R., & Reid, W. (2009). Rémi Brousseau et Pierre Rousseau et le Théâtre Denise-Pelletier. HEC Montréal Catalogue de cas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gronn, P. (2002). Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 423–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janis, I. (1971). Groupthink. Psychology Today.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K. A. (1997a). Affective and cognitive conflict in work groups: Increasing performance in value-based intragroup conflict. In C. De Dreu & E. Van de Vliert (Eds.), Using Conflict in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K. A. (1997b). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimension in organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 530–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 741–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R. M., & Lewicke, R. J. (2010). Repairing and enhancing trust: Approaches to reducing organizational trust deficits. The Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 245–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lampel, J., Lant, T., & Shamsie, J. (2000). Balancing act: Learning from organizing practices in cultural industries. Organization Science, 11(3), 263–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A. (2003). Leadership: Starting at the top. In C. L. Pearce & J. A. Conger (Eds.), Shared Leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership (pp. 271–284). Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, R. A. (1986). From impressario to arts administrator: Formal accountability in nonprofit cultural organizations. In P. J. DiMaggio (Ed.), Nonprofit Enterprise in the Arts: Studies in Mission and Constraint (pp. 161–183). New York and Ox-ford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reay, T., & Hining, C. R. (2009). Managing the rivalry of competing institutional logics. Organization Studies, 30(6), 629–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid, W., & Karambayya, R. (2009). Impact of dual executive leadership dynamics in creative organizations. Human Relations, 62(7), 1073–1112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, J. H. (27 August 2005). The fine line between art and business; More than a dozen U. S. museums looking for a new director are divided over who’s better for the job: The cultured scholar or the number-crunching executive? New York Times, p. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simons, T. L., & Peterson, R. S. (2000). Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management teams: The pivotal role of intragroup trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 102–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wendellyn Reid .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Reid, W. (2014). Artists and Managers as Executive Leaders of Arts Organizations. In: Henze, R. (eds) Kultur und Management. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05871-5_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05871-5_20

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-05870-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-05871-5

  • eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Science (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics