With grant deadlines galore falling in the winter and early spring, many arts managers are poring over budgets and reports for funders – while at the same time juggling the demands of artistic programming in full swing.
These can feel like “weeks of reckoning” where you’re justifying your existence to grantors while working like crazy to maximize today’s successes.
If you’re run off your feet and wondering why you chose this crazy business, check out this short excerpt from Finance for the Arts in Canada, which may help provide some perspective on budgeting an the real world:
The ability to stick to a budget is held as an important benchmark: it’s senseless to invest a lot of time and energy into a plan that’s going to be discarded the moment things change. However, rigid management stifles creativity, and extreme meticulousness can produce needless bureaucracy. The degree of rigour beneficial to a given company depends on factors such as its size and complexity, the risk inherent in its programming (e.g., a choreographic workshop or artist-run centre may need more flexibility than a classical ballet company or major art museum), the skill level of decision-makers, and the attitudes and preferences of the leadership.
Managers are expected to know how to implement a budget (that is, to follow the script, as it were, by setting activities in motion, making the planned purchases and generating the targeted revenues). A complementary expectation is that managers will have the “chops” to manage change while maintaining stability. No year goes fully according to plan — not ever! When confronted by the unexpected, leaders are expected to step up and decide what to do next. These expectations, by the way, come from all directions. Volunteer board members look to paid managers for expertise. Senior staff look to the director for coordination, and more junior staff to managers for specific instruction on what to do.
When you take on a financial management role, you agree not only to balance the demands of a script (your budget) against the exigencies of daily life (the improv element), but also to do so while responding to the expectations of colleagues, your employer (the board) and perhaps other stakeholders. With so many factors at play, it is clear that to thrive, an organization needs more than a skilled manager, it needs recognized and shared processes that provide a framework for adapting to circumstances. In the absence of functional collaboration amongst staff members and between the board and staff, the best financial manager can be thwarted. A productive combination of smarts and structure equips the organization to move forward. An outcome may differ from expectations, but if there’s general agreement that contingencies were handled as well as possible, then the result may be considered a success.
From Finance for the Arts in Canada, Volume 2: Financial Management; Chapter 4: Managing Successfully Throughout the Year
