When You’re the Team, Capacity Is a Business Strategy
I haven’t published here since May 18. That wasn’t the plan.
I experienced some significant changes in my personal life that required my attention, and for a while, I had less capacity to give For de Arts. I have a full-time career, and that work continued while I allowed this part of my professional life to become quiet.
I’m intentionally leaving some of that story there. The details belong to me, and more importantly, they aren’t necessary to understand what the experience clarified for me.
I keep thinking about Everything Everywhere All at Once.
Evelyn is trying to be a business owner, wife, mother, daughter, taxpayer, caretaker and problem-solver, while increasingly absurd demands compete for the same finite supply of her attention. There are whole universes available to her, and she is still one person standing in a laundromat trying to get through the day.
I know a few nonprofit arts professionals who might find that scenario familiar.
Because when you are the marketing department, or the executive director and development department, or the artistic director who also handles ticketing, or the consultant who is also accounting, sales, communications, and administration, your problem is rarely a shortage of things worth doing.
The problem is that one human being cannot be fully present in every universe at once.
And eventually, something does not get your attention.
Small teams need a different operating philosophy
One of the mistakes I see in our sector is taking strategies designed for organizations with substantial staff capacity and shrinking them down for smaller organizations.
We keep the expectations and reduce the people.
A larger organization may have separate staff members responsible for email, social media, press, audience development, graphic design, ticketing, fundraising, and digital advertising. At a smaller organization, we might hand most of those responsibilities to one person and call it a communications job.
Then we wonder why consistency becomes difficult.
After nearly 15 years working in nonprofit arts marketing, I have become increasingly convinced that small-team strategy has to begin with a different question. We have to ask what this organization can reasonably sustain with the people, money, attention, and energy actually available to it.
That means accepting that some worthwhile things will remain undone.
I know that sentence can make ambitious people uncomfortable. I am one of them.
There is always another audience we could reach, another campaign we could build, another partnership we could develop, another platform where we could become more active. The work matters, which makes saying no especially difficult.
Still, ambition does not create additional capacity.
Prioritization means somebody is leaving a universe behind
There is a version of prioritization that sounds very tidy in planning meetings. We identify the priorities, put them on a calendar, assign deadlines, and get to work.
Real prioritization is messier because deciding what deserves attention also means deciding what will receive less of it.
Sometimes significantly less.
For de Arts received less of mine this summer.
That decision was not particularly satisfying. I still care deeply about this work. I still have ideas for where I want this consultancy to go. I still believe there is a need for practical strategy built specifically for small and mid-sized arts organizations.
My ambition remained.
My urgency changed.
That distinction has become important to me because small teams frequently treat every meaningful goal as an immediate obligation. We can easily end up with annual plans full of worthy priorities and no honest accounting of what happens when two people are expected to deliver all of them.
And then life happens.
Someone gets sick. A family member needs care. A position stays vacant longer than expected. Funding changes. A major program suddenly requires more attention. The executive director has to become the emergency grant writer. The marketing manager inherits box office responsibilities. The consultant experiences a significant change in her personal life.
The spreadsheet may still say everything is due Thursday.
Human capacity has other ideas.
Sustainability includes the ability to stop
This experience also changed how I think about sustainability.
Sometimes sustainability isn’t about finding a way to keep producing. Sometimes sustainability is having enough structure around your life that you can stop producing without everything collapsing.
I had that structure.
For de Arts is not currently responsible for keeping a roof over my head. My full-time employment gave me room to allow the consultancy to become quiet when my capacity changed.
I recognize that as both a privilege and a strategic lesson.
Organizations need their own versions of that structure.
That might include financial reserves that allow a vacant position to remain vacant until the right person is hired. It might include documentation so institutional knowledge does not live entirely inside one employee’s head. It might include realistic production calendars, cross-training, automated processes where they genuinely reduce repetitive work, or an explicit agreement about which activities pause when capacity drops.
This is operational design, and it is also care.
A study of "Black Perspectives on Creativity, Trustworthiness, Welcome, and Well-Being" described self-care as essential rather than an add-on, with participants connecting care to relationships, community, and environments that support well-being. That framing resonates with me because our organizations are also environments. The way we design the work affects the people doing it.
We cannot talk seriously about sustainable arts organizations while designing jobs that depend on people functioning at full capacity indefinitely.
The moment of truth
Here is the question I think small organizations have to become more comfortable asking:
If one person’s capacity dropped by 30 percent next month, what would we intentionally stop doing?
Not what would we squeeze into somebody else’s workload. Not what could we somehow get done if everyone pushed a little harder.
What would stop?
If the answer is nothing, then the organization may already be relying on invisible excess capacity from its people.
That excess capacity might look like answering emails after dinner, doing social media on weekends, skipping vacation during performance season, keeping undocumented systems alive through memory, or quietly absorbing responsibilities from a position the organization cannot afford to fill.
It works until it doesn’t.
For small teams, knowing what does not get attention can be every bit as strategic as deciding what does.
You can keep your eye on the prize without running toward it every day
I am still ambitious about For de Arts.
The months when I published nothing did not erase that.
What changed was the timeline, because for a season of my life, other things needed the capacity I normally gave this work.
I think our organizations deserve permission to think this way too.
There will be seasons when growth is possible and seasons when maintaining relationships, serving existing audiences, and protecting staff capacity deserve more attention. There will be programs worth pursuing later. There will be platforms we simply do not need to be on right now. There will be good ideas that remain good ideas even when we decide this is not their year.
The prize can stay the prize while the pace changes.
Maybe that is one of the more useful lessons of being a small team. We cannot be everything, everywhere, all at once, so we have to become very clear about where we are choosing to be.
And sometimes, sustainability looks like having built enough support around ourselves and our organizations that we can be somewhere else for a while.
Comments