Part 2 of a series about the financial crisis at the Nashville Symphony through the lens of strategy.
My original piece about the Nashville Symphony was always the first in a four-part series, with the second piece discussing “restructuring” an organization.
Then, I saw Ruth Hartt’s piece on the Oracle gift.
Ruth shared a link to a Nashville Business Journal piece where the Symphony’s new CEO, Mark Tillinger, says that the Symphony will honor Oracle’s investment with “the difficult but necessary work of restructuring our operations, bringing our costs and revenues into balance.”
The interview sharpened my thinking about “restructuring.”
In most cases, “restructuring” means three things:
· Cutting jobs.
· Cutting programs.
· Rolling out an unconvincing communications effort. With the illusion of transparency.
The facts don’t change: a miracle arrived.
And, from the looks of things…the strategy is still the same.
How do we know?
The board didn’t choose real change. They hired themselves. By picking one of its own: Mark Tillinger.
His LinkedIn says he is still on the board of directors.
His specialty…restructuring.
Restructuring is a flinch. “Restructuring” is what you do when you don’t want to make a hard decision.
“Restructuring” means three things:
Cutting Jobs.
The furloughs cut everyone: 77 musicians. 27 staff.
The Oracle gift allowed everyone to be recalled.
But this won’t be the end of the cuts. Cutting costs and restructuring always means “doing more with less.”
The brunt of “doing more with less” always falls on the same people: the ones that make the art and the ones that know the customers.
Cutting Programs.
I’m a big fan of killing off products and services that don’t deliver value.
But in a “restructuring” value isn’t the leading factor, costs usually are.
In Tillinger’s statement, he mentioned bringing costs and revenues into line.
The reality: cost cutting is easier than revenue generation.
So, the “fiscally responsible” thing becomes cutting. The crisis is the excuse.
The cuts become the strategy.
Unconvincing Messages:
“Difficult but necessary.”
“Bringing costs and revenue into balance.”
“Financial turnarounds.”
Each sounds like a decision. But none of them is one.
All seem like something you can’t argue with…meaningful.
But are empty.
Not a decision in the bunch.
A flinch.
“Restructuring” is backward-looking.
“Restructuring” starts with the current budget and asks, “What can we cut?”
“Zero Based Budgeting” asks what we need to answer the big questions: “What does success look like?” and “What do we need to be successful?”
Strategy is a bet.
Why do businesses flinch on strategy?
Because the bet is scary…you might be wrong.
That’s why the board’s decision is dangerous. They’ve picked “restructuring.”
Cutting and communications.
The board picked the “safe” path.
There’s nothing “safe” about it. It is a flinch.
But we’ve seen this play out before…in Nashville.
In 2013, the Symphony nearly lost the Schermerhorn to foreclosure. Martha Rivers Ingram stepped in to rescue the Symphony.
The pandemic cost the organization $10M in revenue.
Staff layoffs relieved some of the pressure in 2024 and 2025.
Now this.
COVID is a convenient excuse, but it was six years ago…with two rounds of layoffs since. The 2013 crisis was seven years before that.
These aren’t freak events. They highlight a structural problem that goes back more than a decade.
These excuses are a flinch. Designed to avoid real strategic decisions.
“Restructuring” is the word you use when you are afraid to make the tough decisions.
…
Strategy looks forward.
The board needs to ask questions that move the organization forward.
“What does success look like?”
Not the market’s definition. Not what you think people want to hear.
Yours.
“Who is the Nashville Symphony for?”
Not a faceless “audience.”
Real people. Who are they? What do they want that the symphony can provide?
Name them.
“Why are these people choosing the symphony over the alternatives?”
Netflix. A restaurant. Staying home. Working late.
What does the symphony do for people that makes them give us their money? Their time? Their attention?
Especially versus the alternatives.
These questions push you to make a bet.
Not restructuring…but a real bet. A risk, but a bet.
Are you “restructuring” or betting?
DW