One of the more popular analogies used to describe a leader is that of an orchestra conductor. The image has everything the most ardent leadership guru could want – flair, style, sophistication, artistry, commanding presence, mastery of the material, complete control over the process.
There are two other key elements strongly emphasized: vision and followership. The silver-maned, tuxedo-clad maestro enters to thunderous applause, takes his place before the orchestra, and raises his baton. The place is suddenly electric with silent anticipation. The audience holds its breath, bracing itself for what is to come. The players lock their eyes on the great man, instruments at the ready, Then, magic happens:
His grand vision of the music emanates from his baton, enlivens the performers, coordinating the intricate flow of melody, rhythm, percussion – now colliding in exquisite dissonance, next resolving into sublime harmony.
That’s how we want to imagine ourselves, isn’t it? The focal point of it all – of employee and customer, the indispensable artiste, with the ineffable understanding of what the one can do and the other wants, and the solitary, wondrous ability to draw it from the one and weave it together for the benefit of all, to everyone’s amazed adulation.
But let’s take another look at this picture. There is something else at work, here, that is as or more responsible for all of this: the score.
Forgot about that, didn’t you? The true visionary is the composer, not the conductor. And the real instrument of coordination is the score, versions of which are open before every orchestra member – including the conductor.
That doesn’t really leave him with much to do, does it? Other than to keep time. And, perhaps, to make a spectacle of himself.
Of course there’s more – and also less – than that going on during the preparation and presentation of a musical performance. But the conductor is often less important than the audience is led to believe – even no more important than the other members. Indeed, why not just dispense with him? As it happens, there are some very fine orchestras that have done just that.
Is that how you see yourself – as a superannuated peacock, quietly dispensed with? If we continue to cling to ideas about ourselves and our roles that are outdated, and that produce more PR than profit, that may very well happen. And why not? After all, there are some very fine companies where it already has.
—
Today’s tips: Speaking of leadership gurus, the word’s getting out on those guys; please see this essay by Steve Tobak at BNET. And speaking of BNET, it is a wonderful collection of insightful commentary, uniquely relevant news, and terrific hints and hacks – you should subscribe.
And as long as we’re talking about magic and special people, please see this special report on entrepreneurship, from the current Economist. Note the difficulty in dealing with the definition; the declared, versus the actual, use of the word.
Here’s a great way to kill some time: follow up. Please see what John Phillips has to say about how and why you might want to do that. And while you’re reading, be mindful that the advice is coming not just from an expert in workplace management – but from a lawyer, as well.
—
Have you noticed the blue “Sphere” icon, below? When you click on it, it will produce a window offering you content related to today’s item from other blogs and the regular media. Give it a try!
And, while you’re clicking around down there, don’t forget to subscribe, by email or RSS reader!
Technorati Tags: leader, orchestra, conductor, leadership, guru, control, vision, followership, employee, customer, visionary, composer, coordination, Steve Tobak, BNET, entrepreneurship, Economist, John Phillips, expert, workplace, management, lawyer
Sphere: Related Content
You know, it’s misinformed nonsense like this that perpetuates the incorrect impressions people have about what it is a conductor actually does. (I blame all those Bugs Bunny cartoons!)
Of course, the “true visionary” is the composer. That’s why we classical musicians devote our lives to studying and performing their works hundreds of years after they were written. However, you are quite incorrect with your suggestion that every player has a score. This could not be further from the truth!
A typical conductor’s score has anywhere from 10 to 50 lines of music to be read simultaneously. The conductor must spend countless hours studying scores in preparation for rehearsals, for he is in fact the ONLY member of the ensemble who has a blueprint of what everyone is supposed to be doing. Each section of the orchestra has only their OWN part in front of them. The violins don’t know what the flute is playing. The timpani has no clue when the cellos are going to come in. Given that there are 80-100 people on stage, with differing experiences, musical attitudes, and abilities – SOMEONE has to lead. And that someone damn well knows what he’s doing.
Don’t believe me? Watch these 2 minutes of rehearsal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLLzZVsErjo
What you see in concert, when a conductor leads an ensemble through a performance, is the end product of dozens of hours of study by the conductor, and then yet another dozen hours or more of rehearsal.
Finally, the idea that the orchestra could do just fine without a conductor is also quite untrue. Yes there are orchestras, the oft-mentioned Orpheus Chamber Orchestra being the most celebrated, which performs sans conductor. However, what is less well-known is that in rehearsal, each and every rehearsal, the Orpheus Chamber Orchestra chooses someone from the orchestra to conduct. And they must hold many more rehearsals than most orchestras in order to prepare for a performance without a conductor.
I’ve played in professional orchestras as a violinist for over 20 years, and have conducted for over a decade. Ask any professional musician playing in a major orchestra if it would be possible to perform a major work of Shostakovich, Mahler, or Schoenberg without a conductor. I assure you the answer will be, “no”. And this is why the Orpheus Chamber Orchestra is a “Chamber” orchestra, and not a full orchestra.
Hello Mr. Wheatley,
First of all, allow me to say that while I wrote this, I did not write any Bugs Bunny cartoons, and resist the suggestion that I either misrepresent or minimize the role of the conductor in an orchestral performance (although – come on! – those cartoons were fantastic!).
The target of this post is not the conductor, but the business “leader” who succumbs to the encouragement to cultivate grandiose images of him- or herself. With that in mind, please allow me to make a few points, with the understanding that they are not intended to dispute yours, but rather to amplify my own.
The matter of the score: It is true that the conductor’s is the only one that encompasses all the information in the piece – each player’s music sheets contain only their own contribution. But that is part of the reason why the phenomenon of such conductorless ensembles as the Orpheus Chamber Orchestra is so interesting.
While this isn’t the place to go into a detailed discussion of what they actually do, it is a bit more complex, as I’m confident you know full well, than simply having members take turns conducting rehearsals. It amounts to direction from within, originating in doers, and expressed collaboratively, rather than merely in putatively specially gifted overseers, bestowing their gifts from above. I am aware that you, together with many deservedly well-regarded conductors, share a perspective and insight into your work something like this in that you are an accomplished virtuoso, yourself, on an orchestral instrument.
To the extent that this post does address the role of the conductor, it is for the purpose of providing a more realistic image to be used by business leaders who insist on it. In this vein, I hoped, obviously not as successfully as I might have, to normalize the conductor as one of many accomplished musicians, with his or her own role, as the others each have their own.
You might have pressed me further in this regard by pointing out that while there are conductorless orchestras, there aren’t many, and have never really been many full-sized ones, either. Any one who listens to orchestral music knows that the experience can vary widely according to the conductor – even according to the conductor’s stage of development or mood. I would only add that this applies to the qualities of the performers as well, independent of that of the conductor.
It is well to say that the conductor’s role is to interpret and direct, often even to choose the music. It might be useful too to note that performers have their views and strong feelings about both the pieces played and the contributions to them made by their own and others’ instruments. I would like to think of conductors and performers feeding off of each other, and reading the information generated by that dynamic feedback in the performance – but not solely in the person – of the conductor.
Sorry about the long response! I felt that your thoughtful, passionate, and intelligent comment deserved it. I hope I have addressed your concerns while explaining my own. Thank you so much for your visit, for sharing your observations, and, of course, for your work (and that of your colleagues)!