In each art and cultural nonprofit I have worked for, whether a museum, film, artist services or art education organization, the staff has been overwhelmingly female. However, the directors and heads of departments have been predominantly male. The clear gender imbalance seems almost too mundane to point out, but for a sector that prides itself on creativity, new ideas, and respecting different viewpoints, the lack of women in leadership roles in the nonprofit arts has become a serious point of contention for me. While there are important and influential women in high positions in arts administration, such as Emily Rafferty, the first woman President of the Metropolitan Museum of Art and Vishaka Desai, President and CEO of the Asia Society, women are not equally represented at senior level positions or on the boards of arts organizations.
Certainly, this has little to do with women’s qualifications for the job. In terms of higher education, women have eclipsed men. According to the New York Times, as of September 2011, “Women earned about two-thirds of the graduate certificates awarded in 2009-10, as well as 60 percent of the master’s degrees and 52 percent of the doctorates,” though the article does not mention specifically which fields.
Gender inequality is not ignored in the arts world, but the underlying causes behind it, and the effect that has on the structure of arts organizations, is not deeply discussed. I would like the field to directly address these questions: why are so many directors men when a majority of women work in the arts in entry and middle management-level positions and have strong professional experience and education? And how does this impact arts organizations’ capacity for innovation and dynamic change?
Linda Norris on her blog the Uncataloged Museum posed a similar the question with a blunt sense of humor. She asked, “What does it take to be an art museum director?” The answer she found was, “Evidently, be a white man!” She conducted informal research by monitoring the Art Museum Partnership Facebook page, where new directors for art museums are announced, from August to November of 2011. She found that, “Of the 15 directors named, only 4 were women, that’s just 26 percent… Admittedly, this is a highly unscientific survey, but revealing nonetheless.”
These issues are further explored in the “Women in arts and cultural heritage” video from the UK-based Creative Choices that was released in 2010. The video highlights the challenges facing women who pursue careers in arts management. These frustrations will sound familiar to readers no matter what their gender: low pay, burnout from balancing long hours at work with other life commitments, frustration generated from passionately pursuing a chosen career and finding few opportunities for advancement.
The video underlines the importance of role models for women who are emerging as leaders in the arts as a solution to this problem. However, the solutions it proposes to address the lack of women in leadership positions are technical: it advocates the implementation of policies that make a workplace more friendly to a variety of lifestyle needs, such as flextime, job sharing, and paid maternity leave.
Underlying assumptions about gender and leadership run deep in the social fabric and are hard to shake, even in a “progressive” field like the arts. These assumptions include the idea that women working in the arts have a partner to support them financially, are less ambitious career-wise, will leave the workforce when they have children, and are not as serious or as savvy about financial, technical and legal matters as their male counterparts. Given these ideas, which are perpetuated by people of all genders, hiring a woman for a top job is perceived as a risk, even when they have proven professional and academic track records.
I think those who want to embrace innovation in leadership practice must ask how expanding our definition of who is, and can be, a powerful leader can help address gender imbalance in arts organizations. Two practical solutions to address the dearth of women in leadership arts positions are: Changing the boards of arts organizations and implementing mentoring programs to cultivate emerging women leaders. A 2008 article in the Guardian reported that whether or not women are in leadership positions in the arts depends of the size, scope and type of organization. It emphasized the make up of the board as being a key factor in the make up of an organization’s leadership, as many nonprofit boards are still predominantly men who tend to favor hiring other men. The message is clear: changing the make up of the board can change who gets promoted into a leadership role.
Mentoring is another way to break through the glass ceiling of arts leadership and make organizations more hospitable to women leaders. ArtTable, a networking organization for women working the arts, formed in 1981 on the idea that a strong network of women arts leaders can help counter the attitudes of the “old boys club.” All arts organizations can support mentoring and networking opportunities for those at entry and middle management levels, as well as at the board level to create a organization that cultivates and recognizes a wider variety of candidates as emerging leaders. A mentor can get to know a younger person’s ambitions and help nurture them, while providing guidance on how to acquire the skills to make those ambitions become a reality. In addition, mentors could be advocates for their mentees and help open up doors for career advancement that might otherwise be closed to them.
Mentorship and including more women on nonprofit boards certainly is not the only answer to address the society wide problem of sexism, but they could be a start. Gender inequity in leadership and the lack of forward thinking solutions to address it extends far beyond the art world. Addressing it fully will be part of a societal shift towards recognizing an array of leadership qualities and qualifications.
What do you think?
- Are organizations that embrace innovation, change and fresh ways of thinking about their practice are also more equitable?
- How do you think addressing gender inequity can make arts organizations more innovative?
- How must the nonprofit arts world change to address the gender imbalance in leadership?
- And in your experience, are mentoring programs and a change in the make-up of the board part of the solution?