1. Brennan, Dana, Dave, Michelle Leadership Ensemble Orpheus: A Conductor-less Orchestra

2. Introduction  New York based orchestra established in 1974  Founded by Julian Fifer  Consists of 27 members  Famous for implementing a “leaderless” orchestra  “Orpheus” – name for Greek god who created music so powerful, stones rose and followed him

3. Agenda  Motivation  Decision Making  Leadership  Team Cohesion and Structure  Conclusion

4. Motivation  Success  The Early Stages  Job Satisfaction  Problems  Solution

5. Motivation  Musicians: More talent = greater career options  No matter how successful, most resort to teaching  Members of Orpheus unsatisfied in conventional orchestras; under the control of a conductor

6. The Early Stages  Motivation undermined by having to follow conductor’s strict rules  Success is defined as “how you can follow other orchestra’s members actions”  “The climate in most conductor-led orchestras is appalling”

7. The Early Stages  The aspect of “making good music” is relinquished  Must be self-motivated due to steep competition  Much time devoted to studying music – individuals invest much pride and ego in career

8. The Early Stages  Self-expression in music more difficult if orchestra conductor-led  Individuality proves relatively useless in conventional orchestras as conductor tells you what to do  Formal training is only required for entry into orchestra

9. Job Satisfaction  Widespread discontent among symphony musicians in 4 countries  Musicians believe that their talent is underrepresented in an orchestra  One Orpheus member said, “You must be careful not to let symphony job conflict with making music.”

10. Problems  Conductor control leads to lack of communication between musicians  Overall spirit lost due to strict control of conductor  Members not inspired to work as a team

11. Solution  Create an orchestra based on a new philosophy  Julian Fifer selected musicians who could handle and give criticism to fellow musicians  Create an atmosphere where individual spirits and enthusiasm determined orchestra outcome

12. Solution  No particular method was implemented to gain ideas for pieces of music  Every member contributes ideas for each piece of music  This encouraged members to use their talents and training to determine overall success

13. Decision Making  Unanimous Decisions  Core Groups  Concert Master

14. Unanimous Decision Making  All 27 members participated  Strong willed musicians  Why this is a problem

15. Core Groups  Formulate interpretations  Same preparations as a conductor  Each presents to ensemble  Rotate regularly

16. Concert Master  Team Captain vs. Coach  Responsibilities  Influence  Rotation  Executive Committee

17. Leadership  Leadership and feedback  Teamwork leads to trust  Every musician is a leader

18. Leadership  “Each musician in Orpheus will…sit in the audience to hear how each piece sounds to a concertgoer”  Without a conductor each member must play the role of leader  Personal feedback from colleagues is vital

19. Teamwork & Leadership  Teams in Orpheus rely on individual members having a common objective  Each team shares common values leading to a high degree of respect among all members  Highly cohesive team with defined roles, accountability and trust  Stage 2 Organization

20. Teamwork & Leadership  Core-group in Orpheus changes regularly  Each member responsible for leadership training  Leaders are constantly dealing with change in groups  Responsible for envisioning, energizing and enabling new members in orchestra  Personal development among members: ”This experience has allowed me to discover strengths that I didn’t know I had.”

21. Team Cohesion and Structure  Practical Considerations  Team Cohesion  Drawbacks  Benefits

22. Practical Considerations  No director, or full-time members  Members must take on freelance opportunities  Bassoonist Frank Morelli: Only provides 10% of his yearly income, but “artistically, it may be the most rewarding work he’s ever done.”

23. Team Cohesion  Substitutes to cover for unavailable members  The ‘whole’ must be the same, in spite of the rotating identities of the ‘parts’  One member from each instrument section fluent in Orpheus’ leadership process must perform at each concert

24. Team Cohesion  Orchestra has a dozen regular substitutes  An “extended family of musicians”  Substitutes must contribute their opinions  “Hearing fresh, new ideas is always good.”

25. Team Cohesion  A high degree of interaction among members  Somewhat difficult entry Both in terms of skill and artistic philosophyBoth in terms of skill and artistic philosophy  A common external challenge Upcoming performancesUpcoming performances

26. Team Cohesion  Longevity leads to familiarity, not only with your job, but with your co-workers  Familiarity leads to predictability  “You can anticipate one another’s every move.”

27. Drawbacks  The pressure to achieve cohesion quickly  The time it takes to organize a structure that works  Divergent philosophies may lead to conflict among team members

28. Benefits  Flexibility  Collaboration = free exchange of ideas  An essential formation of trust  Artistic freedom and self-expression  Higher levels of job satisfaction

29. Conclusion  Motivation Greater involvement leads to greater job satisfaction Greater involvement leads to greater job satisfaction  Decision Making Dividing into core groups leads to teamwork and trust Dividing into core groups leads to teamwork and trust

30. Conclusion  Leadership Collaborative due to common objective and shared values Collaborative due to common objective and shared values  Team Cohesion Cohesion results from new ideas contributed by rotating members Cohesion results from new ideas contributed by rotating members There are benefits and drawbacks; success depends on situation There are benefits and drawbacks; success depends on situation

31. Questions…