 |
 |
This is an excellent point and I completely agree. There are limitations to applying arts processes to large groups. Even processes for ensemble group working or working within the feudal structures of an orchestra aren't useful for very large groups. Having said that, most organizational work is done in smaller groups of people, perhaps for this very reason. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 30, 2012, at 5:13 AM, "Piers Ibbotson" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > This is such an interesting conversation. I wonder of there is an element that we overlook when we talk about the qualities of artistic processes: and that is the question of group size. The silos and bureacracies that impede adaptability and creativity in organisations are a product of their size. Very large numbers of people cannot order their activities without them and their existence then reinforces the kind of status differences and ego games that make creative collaboration difficult. Large groups also cannot provide the quality of mutual trust and intimacy that frees people to take risks. Artistic collaborations only ever take place in small groups. Even the very largest artistic performances you can imagine have no more than about 150 performers in them and the vast majority of productions far, far fewer. > There is some interesting research going on around group size in primate societies that seems to sit very well with observations of what constitutes a stable, healthy, creative community. Thinking about organisations as relatively simple structures composed of huge numbers of people (I had a brief from a company that refered to their "top team" of 500 senior executives) is clearly missing something. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Brenda Parkerson > To: [log in to unmask] > Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2012 6:45 PM > Subject: Re: choreography and dynamic structures - follow up and WSCI > > I would venture to say that adaptation is par for the course in choreography and is indeed a very useful model for business and in particular for line management and leading teams. You work with what you've got and together you make it work to serve the artistic vision of the choreographer. It is a fascinating interdependent relationship between choreographer and performer that requires trust and a willingness to take personal risks. I believe that the relationship is really quite fragile. There is something here that is apolitical which I can't quite articulate. Perhaps when personal politics enters the equation (i.e. a dancer vying for a bigger role, promotion or other career move) the creative process is hindered or burdened. > This can be seen in the film Stricktly Bolshoi - about Christopher Wheeldon's struggle to set a piece at the Bolshoi. The star dancer was not able to take a risk with Wheeldon fearing he might end up in a bad piece. It was recast with dancers lower in rank (with nothing to lose). If you haven't seen this film, you should. Collaboration and artistic egos do not make for an easy ride! > Best, > Brenda > > On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Stephen Carroll <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Katrin, > > Thinking about Steve ‘s comments about his theatre experiences working with choreographers, I recently observed stage productions in which choreographers played a major role. In the last week I attended an opera –Havisham by Argento- and a play about Darwin entitled Sandwalk on my campus in which choreographers played major roles. By incorporating significant dance elements into both productions, the performances were enhanced significantly in an aesthetic sense as well as advancing the narratives. In the dancing elements of the performances , dance movements compatible with the capabilities of the singers and actors were introduced congruent with the usual space, music, lighting, and aesthetic limitations and considerations. The choreographers had to collaborate with actors, singers, as well as stage and musical directors and others to make these productions the memorable performances they were. Extensive rehearsals identified possible future problems which were then effectively made less probable. High adaptation skills for these choreographers were critical to their success. > > > > Many management academics and consultants over the past forty years have described the inability of many organizations of all types to adapt and change effectively when faced with changing circumstances. Traditional command and control systems, bureaucracies, internal silos as well as differences in subunit cultures, often prevent necessary collaboration and problem solving from occurring. Awareness of the choreographic model might be very helpful in such organizational design and change programs. > > Steve C. > > Stephen (Steve) Carroll > Maryland Business School > 301/405-2239 > [log in to unmask] > > > -----"Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: ----- > To: [log in to unmask] > From: Katrin Kolo > Sent by: "Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network" > Date: 04/25/2012 05:37PM > Subject: choreography and dynamic structures - follow up and WSCI > > > Dear AACORNERs, > > it’s impressing how many mails with great thoughts have already been sent. I am extremely grateful, that this network exists. Thanks to all of you, who make this such a remarkable meeting and discussing space! > > > > I decided to collect emails and follow discussions individually, in order to summarize and then bring the theme back to all AACORNers. I hope this way, I respect also the people in the network, who are not too interested in this vibrant mail traffic. Hope this is fine for all of you. > > > > There is only question I would like to ask right now: Is there anyone of you, who knows something about “service choreography” notation (WSCI)? I would love to learn more about this. > > > > Thanks again > > Best > > Katrin > > > > > -- > Brenda Parkerson > (347) 443-7373 > http://www.linkedin.com/in/brendaparkerson > >