Read the case through first to get familiar with the issues, and answer the questions in your own words. Please be detailed.
From a leadership perspective what leadership initiated the issues involved in the case?? What?leadership issues involved in the case?? Who demonstrated leadership? How were followers led? How did followers interact? Recommendations? Better alternatives? Dated leadership?
Rev: November 9, 2010 Turnaround and Transformation: Leadership and Risk at
Boston?s Institute of Contemporary Art
Cate Reavis On February 9, 2009, Shepard Fairey, a renowned street artist known for his iconic red, white and
blue, ?hope?, ?change?, and ?progress? posters of Barack Obama that were used in the president?s
election campaign, was on his way to an opening night party for his ?Supply and Demand? exhibition
at Boston?s Institute of Contemporary Art when he was arrested on an outstanding warrant outside the
front door. Fairey had failed to appear in court three days earlier on a vandalism charge dating back to
While the arrest interrupted the opening night?s festivities?and was a definite downer for the nearly
800 people who were awaiting Fairey?s arrival, some of whom had purchased tickets on Craig?s List
for $5001?it did nothing to dampen public enthusiasm for Fairey?s exhibit. Between February and
the exhibition?s closing in August, 130,000 people attended the show.
In some sense, the Fairey incident was great PR for the ICA, an institution that had gone through an
enormous transformation under its Director, Jill Medvedow. When Medvedow arrived in 1998, the
ICA had no money, few members, no permanent collection, and, on a good year, clocked 25,000
visitors. Operating out of an old police station on Boylston Street, it was hardly a must-see cultural
destination in Boston. It was considered less a museum and more an ?insider?s art club?.2
By the time of Fairey?s exhibition, the ICA was, quite literally, in a very different place. In 2006 the
museum celebrated the grand opening of its new $51 million building, located on highly coveted 1 Milton Valencia, ?Street Artist Arrested on Way to Event at ICA,? The Boston Globe, February 7, 2009. 2 Geoff Edgers, ?Big Draw,? The Boston Globe, July 19, 2009. This case was prepared by Cate Reavis, Manager, MIT Sloan Teaching Innovation Resources (MSTIR).
Copyright ? 2010, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons AttributionNoncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license visit
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San
Francisco, California, 94105, USA. TURNAROUND AND TRANSFORMATION: LEADERSHIP AND RISK AT BOSTON?S INSTITUTE OF
Cate Reavis waterfront property in South Boston where, over the years, several high-end commercial developers
had failed in their building attempts.
Medvedow?s ability to bring change to an organization that had no power, involved being disciplined,
getting people to believe in an idea, and taking many, many risks.
Contemporary Art in Boston
Up until the late 1920s, modern art in Boston, and throughout the United States, struggled to be taken
seriously. In 1911 the director of Harvard University?s Fogg museum summed up the general feeling
about contemporary art at the time: ?In having exhibitions of the work of living men we may subject
ourselves to various embarrassments.? By the late 1920s, a group of Harvard undergraduates set out
to challenge this viewpoint by forming the Harvard Society of Contemporary Art as a place where the
work of living men could be viewed.3 In 1936 the Society became the Boston Museum of Modern Art
and in 1948 the museum changed its name to the Institute of Contemporary Art. For more than 50
years, the ICA was the only place in Boston dedicated to contemporary art.
Unlike other styles of art, contemporary art, which included visual exhibitions, music, film, video and
performance created by living artists, had never caught on in Boston like it had in other cities, most
notably New York and San Francisco. According to Medvedow, there were a number of theories
When you look at the ecology of what makes a vibrant contemporary art scene, you need to have
several different components that all interact with one another. There need to be art schools and a
strong artist community where work is created and ideas are exchanged. You need collectors,
galleries and institutions that acquire, present, sell, and display that work. Historically, Boston
lacked many of these components, never sustaining a critical mass of contemporary art activity
and, as a result, these gaps prevented the growth of a healthy contemporary art environment in
Added to the ecology argument was the fact that there had been little private and public sector
investment in the arts in Boston, particularly contemporary. Municipal spending for the arts in Boston
was far less than what was spent in four dozen other cities in the United States and, on a broader
scale, Massachusetts ranked 50th among the states for per capita philanthropy.4 As Medvedow
remarked, ?A lot of Boston?s wealth was built on conserving it and less on creating it.? And then
there was the New York factor. As Medvedow noted, ?New York?s artistic energy, support, scale and
audience for the arts of all disciplines, has always been a magnet for Boston?s artist community.? 3 Christine Temin, ?The ICA at 60: Where does the museum fit in?? The Boston Globe, May 5, 1996. 4 Maureen Dezell, ?ICA Faces Fund-raising Challenge,? The Boston Globe, March 10 2000. NOVEMBER 9, 2010 2 TURNAROUND AND TRANSFORMATION: LEADERSHIP AND RISK AT BOSTON?S INSTITUTE OF
Cate Reavis There were members of Boston?s art world that felt the absence of a strong contemporary art
community was a big drawback for Boston. As William Rawn, a Boston architect and long time ICA
board member, explained, ?Artists provide a very different way of looking at the world. They ask
questions that are different from the norm and in Boston, a city that honors academics and inventors,
this is particularly admired.? Furthermore, through their work, contemporary artists reflected what
was currently happening in society and as Vin Cipolla, who served on the ICA board for 16 years and
as its chairman from 1997-2005, noted: ?It?s the role of an institution like the ICA to provide a safe
place where a diversity of perspectives can be expressed to a wide audience.?
This was something Medvedow believed at her core.
Described as ?pathologically optimistic,? Jill Medvedow?s commitment to civic causes began when
she was young. Raised in New Haven, Connecticut, by parents who were political and social activists,
Medvedow admitted that campaigning was something she was exposed to in utero. ?My parents
taught me how to be a good citizen,? she said. ?My mother was deeply engaged in volunteering for
civic and charitable causes and my father was a prominent elected official. I grew up thinking I was
part of the city?s political fabric.?5 Through her upbringing, she ?learned about the basic mechanics of
organizing and how to move an agenda,?6 skill sets that would serve her well in her professional life.
Trained as an art historian, Medvedow arrived in Boston in 1986 from Seattle where she had founded
a nonprofit contemporary arts center. In 1991 she became the first full-time contemporary curator at
the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, bringing in numerous performing and visual artists from
around the world. When she left the Gardner in 1996, Medvedow was determined that her next career
move would involve bringing art to a broader public. ?I was trying to figure out how to build a bridge
between contemporary art and an audience that didn?t have a great affection for it,? she explained. ?I
came up with the idea of framing public art projects through the history and landscape of Boston,
which Bostonians typically have a lot of affection for.? Within a year, she founded Vita Brevis, an
organization devoted to producing temporary public art pieces. With the first Vita Brevis project near
completion, Medvedow found herself being courted to become the ICA?s next director.
According to Rawn, who headed the search committee for the ICA?s new director, it was
Medvedow?s character as much as her curatorial background that made her such an attractive
The minute you met Jill you immediately noticed that she is centered. She is not wowed by
trends. In language, in dress, she is not the least bit pretentious. She doesn?t try to be someone or
something she isn?t. She is not out to prove anything to anybody. She has a strong intellectual
5 Christine Temin, ?Jill Medvedow?s Dreamscape?? The Boston Globe, July 15, 2001. 6 Rachel Strutt, ?The Visionary Jill Medvedow?? The Boston Globe, December 31, 2006. NOVEMBER 9, 2010 3 TURNAROUND AND TRANSFORMATION: LEADERSHIP AND RISK AT BOSTON?S INSTITUTE OF
Cate Reavis base for her opinions on art. This part of her persona was reflected in her vision for the ICA,
which was something that really struck us. She was passionate that the ICA needed to be relevant,
very public and non-elitist, and that in order for it to succeed, it had to be better at outreach
whether it was with school children, local politicians, donors, or members.
A further selling point for the search committee was that because Medvedow was an outsider in the
world of museum directors, she didn?t come with old rivalries or attachments.
Striving to be Marginal
When Medvedow took the reigns in March 1998, the ICA, with a yearly attendance of 25,000 (an
average of 68 people a day) and a paltry budget just shy of $1 million, was in the midst of a severe
identity crisis. The museum was housed in a converted police station and stable on Boylston Street, a
building it had purchased from the city of Boston in the early 1990s with $328,000 in donations from
trustees and overseers.7 (The Boylston address was the 10th location the museum had had since its
founding.) The quirky space was largely defined by an enormous staircase that cut down through the
center of the building?s four floors, creating enormous space contraints for exhibits. Unlike other
Boston-area museums which could hang more than 10 shows a year,8 the ICA was limited to just
four, with months of down time in between shows. Partly because of space and largely because of
money and lack of interest, the ICA had no permanent collection, an important symbol of status in the
museum world, which also helped art institutions create an identity, draw repeat visitors, and build a
donor base. Meanwhile, contemporary art could be viewed at a number of museums throughout
Boston, many of which were backed by well-endowed academic institutions including MIT?s List
Visual Arts Center, the Rose Art Museum (Brandeis), Massachusetts College of Art, the Museum of
Fine Arts, and Harvard University Art Museums. As Medvedow liked to say at the time, ?The ICA
was striving to be marginal.?
Medvedow?s mandate was to stabilize and reinvent. As Cipolla explained,
The ICA was doing some great work but it didn?t really have a point of view. The programming
was spotty, the outreach was not very strategic, and the building we were in was a physical
manifestation of the inadequacy of the organization. The ICA needed to be a place that, by the
nature of its work and outreach, touched multiple facets of the Boston community. In order to
become this, we needed somebody driven, entrepreneurial, who would be forceful about change.
One of the things that set Jill apart from the other candidates wasn?t that she had spent a lifetime
in contemporary art but rather than she understood how to work with audiences. She had the
passion to bring content and interactive thinking and approaches to people of all ages across a
spectrum of interests, getting the ICA outside of an elite and narrow comfort zone. She wasn?t 7 Christine Temin, ?The ICA at 60: Where does the museum fit in?? The Boston Globe, May 5, 1996. 8 Ibid. NOVEMBER 9, 2010 4 TURNAROUND AND TRANSFORMATION: LEADERSHIP AND RISK AT BOSTON?S INSTITUTE OF
Cate Reavis willing to accept that what the ICA had to offer, or what contemporary artists had to say, was not
important for all kinds of people.
As part of her hiring agreement, Medvedow was allowed to bring Vita Brevis with her and fold it into
the ICA?s programming, a move that proved critical over the following years as the ICA strove to
reposition itself. As one journalist noted at the time, ?Since the ICA has so much trouble pulling
people in, putting art where people will virtually have to trip over it may be a smart move.?9
Shortly after her arrival, Medvedow put together a ?business planning group? comprised of three
board members and three outsiders including Sheryl Marshall, who, as a top stockbroker, was a
known business leader in Boston; Nick Littlefield, a lawyer who had served as Senator Edward
Kennedy?s Chief of Staff for 10 years; and, Mary Schneider Enriquez, an art historian and critic who
had recently moved to Boston from Mexico City. (Marshall and Schneider Enriquez would eventually
join the ICA board.) With the help of the business planning group, Medvedow set out to disrupt the
unproductive conversations of the existing board about the future of the ICA. As Medvedow recalled,
?We looked at a number of questions. What kind of audience did we want? Did we want to stay small
and focused or did we want to broaden our offerings? What should be the role of education? We
explored questions involving content, specifically if we should become a collecting institution. And
finally we looked at whether we could do this work in our current Back Bay location.? It didn?t take
long for the group to decide that the ICA needed to grow its audience, expand its educational
initiatives, form a task force to look at the idea of collecting, and begin looking for a new space. (On
two separate occasions, directors of the ICA who preceded Medvedow explored relocating the
museum but were unable to garner board or community support.)
Medvedow?s attention then turned to learning about the Boston real estate market. While she didn?t
know if or how it would be possible, she was clear that the ICA needed to be located on the water:
?Our job is uniquely difficult in that Boston is not a city that embraces contemporary art. Since
everything about our work is unfamiliar, we?re always fighting for an audience. We needed to be
located on the water in order to attract people and motivate them to come back time and again. And a
waterfront location was also a perfect metaphor for what we do which is to expand horizons.?
After many months of knocking on doors to get information on Boston waterfront real estate,
Mevedow?s research picked up momentum when the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation, Justine
Liff, referred her to Ed Sidman, one of Boston?s big real estate developers and a major philanthopist.
Sidman suggested they meet in the lobby of his firm?s building as opposed to his office, a request
which sent an immediate negative signal to Medvedow. But she succeeded in flipping the switch: 9 Christine Temin, ?Seeing the Light,? The Boston Globe, April 19, 1998. NOVEMBER 9, 2010 5 TURNAROUND AND TRANSFORMATION: LEADERSHIP AND RISK AT BOSTON?S INSTITUTE OF
Cate Reavis After listening to my pitch, he was ready to send me off with a name of the next person I should
talk to when I said to him, ?You know, I swim in your pool at the Leventhal-Sidman Jewish
Community Center in Newton.? And he says, ?Oh really.? And I say, ?Yes, and I frequently go to
the openings in the center?s gallery.? The next thing you know he?s saying, ?Let?s go to my
office.? So now we?re in his office and I?ve honed in on his passion which is how to get members
of a JCC to engage in Jewish continuity and not just athletics. We ended up having a deep,
intense conversation. The next thing I know, he has given me a couple good names to pursue for
waterfront real estate. And for the next couple of years, I meet with him regularly to advise him
on his project.
Following up on Sidman?s recommendations, Medvedow eventually landed a meeting with the
Boston 2000 committee. Put together by Mayor Thomas Menino to plan millenial activities for
Boston, one of the committee?s responsibilities was deciding who or what should be designated the
.75 acre parcel, also known as Parcel J, on Boston?s Fan Pier.
Little did she know, the committee would end up being Medvedow?s last stop in her real estate
Fan Pier?s Parcel J
Described as ?a wasteland of parking lots,?10 Parcel J was just a tiny sliver of the 21 acre, 3-million
square foot, nine-block industrial area owned by the Pritzker family, which was slated to be part of
the largest waterfront development in Boston?s history. The proposed plan was to populate the space
with 800 residential units, 1,000 hotel rooms, 150,000 square feet of civic and cultural space, parks
and open space, and an extension of a walkway along Boston Harbor.11 In a deal with the city of
Boston, which enabled them to expand the size of their proposed hotels,12 the Pritzkers agreed to
donate Parcel J to a cultural site.
Medvedow met with the Boston 2000 committee in the spring of 1999. It was a Thursday. Impressed
with her ideas for a future ICA on the waterfront, the committee suggested she present to the Boston
2000 subcommittee on Parcel J. Much to her disbelief, Medvedow found herself committing to giving
a formal, ?this-is-what-we-have-in-mind? presentation the next Tuesday. As she recalled, ?The
decision to go after the parcel was a big leap of faith. It was very hard to imagine we could make the
case given how weak we were.?
Scraping together $5,000, Medvedow hired an architect who drew a mock-up of a future ICA perched
on Parcel J. In giving the architect directives, Medvedow was concerned with one detail: that the
10 Geoff Edgers, ?How They Did It,? The Boston Globe, December 6, 2006. 11 ?Institute of Contemporary Art, Boston Announces Four Internationally Recognized Architecture Firms?.? ICA Press Release, December 13, 2000. 12 It is not uncommon in commercial real estate for a developer to designate a parcel of land in exchange for being allowed to add height to a building as a way to maximize revenue and earning potential.
NOVEMBER 9, 2010 6 TURNAROUND AND TRANSFORMATION: LEADERSHIP AND RISK AT BOSTON?S INSTITUTE OF
Cate Reavis structure fit on the land that was available. Along with the mock-up, Medvedow and a couple ICA
staff members spent the weekend before the presentation making boards of eight museums ? ranging
in size and cost from the Milwaukee Art Museum to Minneapolis? Weisman Art Museum to the Getty
in Los Angeles ? that had been built in different cities since the early 1990s. Their idea was to stress
the point that these museums had catapulted civic life and economic development in their respective
cities and had played an important role in urban rebirth.
Medvedow arrived on the designated Tuesday to present and found to her surprise that the ICA was
one of three finalists who were presenting. One of the other finalists, a collaboration involving the
Wang Center, Boston Ballet and Boston Lyric Opera, proposed a three-stage complex, described as a
cross between Sydney?s Opera House and New York?s Lincoln Center. The $100 million complex
would include a 2,400-seat opera and ballet house, a 500-700-seat playhouse, and a floating stage that
could accommodate an audience of 1,000. Due to its size, the complex was expected to exceed the
allotted space and would require some additional land that had been set aside by the Pritzkers for an
office tower. The other finalist was a relatively unknown Boston-area entrepreneur who wanted to
develop a $40 million Fan Pier Performing Arts and Film Center that would include a 700-seat recital
hall and 125-seat partially open-air theater.
In her pitch, Medvedow stressed that the new ICA would be ?a public destination and the
architectural heartbeat of the city.?13 Funded by a $40 million capital campaign, the four-story
building would occupy 60,000 square feet and would include a 400-seat theater, and a roof sculpture
garden. It would hold up to 2,000 visitors. Medvedow left the presentation thinking that the museum
had a slim shot, at best, of winning Parcel J, but she was increasingly convinced that the waterfront
was the right location for a new ICA. The committee?s final decision would be announced in
Drumming up Support
In the intervening six months, Medvedow got busy educating the public, particularly local politicians,
residents and area artists, on the ICA?s plans for a new home on Fan Pier. To help her sell the idea,
Medvedow approached Gloria Larson, who at the time was a partner at one of Boston?s premier law
firms who specialized in real estate development and government. At the time, Larson was chairman
of the board of the Convention Center Authority and was in the middle of her own campaign to get a
new convention center built in South Boston. As Larson explained, ?I joined the ICA ?campaign? as
both a lawyer and an advocate. I felt like Jill and I were traveling down the same path together.?
In planning the campaign?s strategy, Larson recalled: ?We asked ourselves, ?Who do we need to
touch who normally won?t get touched in a process like this? Who would normally never support
building an ICA on South Boston?s waterfront??? After a bit of reflection, Larson decided to visit a
couple of South Boston?s key political leaders. Larson took Medvedow to meet James Kelly, who at
13 Maureen Dezell, ?ICA Faces Fund-raising Challenge,? The Boston Globe, March 10 2000. NOVEMBER 9, 2010 7 TURNAROUND AND TRANSFORMATION: LEADERSHIP AND RISK AT BOSTON?S INSTITUTE OF
Cate Reavis the time was the city council?s president, state senator Stephen Lynch, and state representative Jack
Hart, all of whom she knew from her law practice and her work on the convention center. The
purpose of the meeting was to educate them on the ICA?s development plans and to hear their
After introductions, Kelly began the conversation by saying, ?You can?t tell us you?re going to build
a contemporary art museum next to Southie.? Medvedow responded by saying, ?Let me tell you about
it. Let me tell you about the programs we have and how I want to bring kids from South Boston in,
and how the world of art is an opportunity to expand their horizons in ways that I know you would
support.? Hearing her out, Kelly?s concerns turned to the infamous Robert Mapplethorpe exhibit.
Shown at the ICA in the early 1990s, the exhibit caused great controversy for its sexually explicit
photographs. ?You have to promise me you will never do a show like that again,? Kelly stated.
Medvedow retorted with: ?You know I can?t make that promise. That would be like me asking you to
promise that you?ll never do anything controversial again. But how about I promise you that if I?m
going to do anything like that, I will give you notice so that you won?t be caught by surprise.? Kelly
quickly responded with, ?Well if you ever do anything like that I will organize a picket.? ?Well if you
organize a picket,? Medvedow said, ?I?ll bring you coffee, because that kind of attention is exactly
what we need to build an audience for the ICA in Boston.? It was at this point in the exchange that
Kelly turned to Larson and said, ?Larson, I like your friend Jill.?
In November 1999 the Boston 2000 committee announced that the ICA had won the Parcel J
competition. Medvedow believed one of the main reasons the ICA was chosen was because the
mock-up demonstrated that from a space perspective, the museum would be a perfect fit. In addition,
the ICA had successfully proven its financial viability to the committee by identifying $12 million?
of which $6 million would come from the sale of its Boylston building?of the estimated $40 million
needed for the project. Larson believed that Medvedow?s ability to assess her audience before sharing
her vision was key to sealing the deal. ?She had a way of presenting to large and small audiences the
concept of a new ICA so that it became something they could own too. She was able to tell the story
in ways that each audience could hear.?
Of course, there were many skeptics of the committee?s decision and the ICA?s plan. Some thought
that locating the ICA away from other cultural attractions was a mistake. After all, it had not been
able to attract visitors when it was located in the heart of Boston?s tourist district. Then there was the
whole issue of money, something the ICA had little of and had no history of raising. While the land
was free, the building and operational costs would more than test the museum?s fundraising
capabilities. As Paul Buttenwieser, ICA board member and Boston philanthropist, put it, ?The key
question is whether the wider community of philanthropic and arts supporters will see this as a
credible project they want to be involved with.?14 14 Maureen Dezell, ?ICA Faces Fund-Raising Challenge,? The Boston Globe, March 10, 2000. NOVEMBER 9, 2010 8 TURNAROUND AND TRANSFORMATION: LEADERSHIP AN...
This question was answered on: Sep 18, 2020
Buy this answer for only: $15
This attachment is locked
We have a ready expert answer for this paper which you can use for in-depth understanding, research editing or paraphrasing. You can buy it or order for a fresh, original and plagiarism-free copy from our tutoring website www.aceyourhomework.com (Deadline assured. Flexible pricing. TurnItIn Report provided)
Pay using PayPal (No PayPal account Required) or your credit card . All your purchases are securely protected by .
About this QuestionSTATUS
Sep 18, 2020EXPERT
GET INSTANT HELP/h4>
We have top-notch tutors who can do your essay/homework for you at a reasonable cost and then you can simply use that essay as a template to build your own arguments.
You can also use these solutions:
- As a reference for in-depth understanding of the subject.
- As a source of ideas / reasoning for your own research (if properly referenced)
- For editing and paraphrasing (check your institution's definition of plagiarism and recommended paraphrase).
NEW ASSIGNMENT HELP?
Order New Solution. Quick Turnaround
Click on the button below in order to Order for a New, Original and High-Quality Essay Solutions. New orders are original solutions and precise to your writing instruction requirements. Place a New Order using the button below.
WE GUARANTEE, THAT YOUR PAPER WILL BE WRITTEN FROM SCRATCH AND WITHIN YOUR SET DEADLINE.