The Innovator's Dilemma Part II Thursday, December 17, 2009 Hello Readers! I apologize that it's been a month since my last post but a toasted hard-drive, some tv-land deadlines and the usual holiday madness has brought a gasping close to 2009. At any rate, here we are together again! If you don't hear from me before the new year, I wish you a happy and healthy 2010. Okay, so on to Part II in my first installment of business book reviews for theater artists. (To read Part I, click here.) To recap, my first review is the MBA standard The Innovator's Dilemma. In this book, the author suggests that it is so difficult for successful organizations to be innovative because they must depart from already successful business practices to find new markets. Ultimately, failure to invest in "disruptive technologies" (technology that looks bad at first but then changes the landscape) causes their downfall. How does this apply to the theater world? My contention in the previous blog post was that the disruptive technology that has the potential to change the game is non-English language theater. Now, before I continue I want to say that ultimately, this is an academic exercise. I know that there are many great theaters out there doing important bi-lingual work and this is not meant to be some grand complaint against the American Theater. Rather, this is an exercise in looking at what the business world is writing about and seeing how it applies to the theater. In order for a disruptive technology to succeed, a number of ingredients need to be in place. 1 - The technology needs early adopters that are willing to pay a premium for it. 2 - The technology needs to be able to be developed broadly for new and innovative uses. So, let's say the artistic directors of the world begin to program seasons with non-English language plays. What happens? Well, first off, these artistic directors can expect to alienate some of their audience. This is what always happens when a new technology is adopted. Old consumers who have invested in the technology aren't equipped to use it and will probably be ticked off that you are asking them to change. So, early adopters need to be there to bolster the technology while it evolves. For the theater, these early adopters take the form of foundations and board members who are willing to underwrite non-English language productions. At first, this may seem like a burdensome endeavor for development departments that are already finding it hard enough to keep the lights on, but as a former fund-raiser, I know that nothing is more appealing to funders than a program that has a plausible method for a real goal. Further, imagine the new funding streams that may open up. Aside from a non-English speaking audience that may arrive at a theaters doors, new donors may arrive as well. Development departments will have an excuse to approach donors they've never approached before. As our country becomes more and more diverse, the number of millionaires who speak English as a second language is growing as well. Non-English language programming will give a Director of Development an excuse to knock on their doors. Now, let's say that new funders have supported a non-English language production. How can a theater make non-English language theater so vital that it changes the nature of the theater-going experience? To this, I would argue that everyone's world is becoming more multi-lingual. If theater is to speak to American society, it must become multi-lingual. Right now, my beloved New York Mets have an English language website AND a Spanish language website. The hit shows Heroes and Lost have portions that are subtitled. Operas are consistently subtitled. The Academy Awards have had a Best Foreign Film category for years. Are we in the theater, the most flexible of performance medium, going to concede cultural multi-multilingualism to Hollywood, opera and the Mets? Trust me, you don't want the Mets at the helm anything so important! Our neighbors comes from places where they didn't grow up reading, Hansel and Gretel or learning Shakespeare in school. They grew up reading The Tiger, the Brahman and the Jackal or learning Calderon. We see people who speak English as a second language in our schools and our communities, isn't it important for them to have a place in our theater? Wouldn't we all be better for it? I'm telling you, there are millions of people who can find many, many new uses for multi-lingual/non-English language theater. Both my parents are college educated with Master's and my dad watched professional wrestling when he first came to America because that's what he could understand. People come to the United States and become Lakers fans in one generation. Why do we need to wait three generations before they become theater fans? In preparations for Part III or this blog, I've contacted some translation schools around the country as well as some organizations that work with the UN, etc. I'll share some of what I've learned in Part III of this blog, which, hopefully will come before 2010! end of scene