Non‐profit theatre managers as multi‐stakeholder managers: The plate‐spinning of accountability

Abstract

AbstractThis exploratory study identifies that more can be understood about how accountability operates within an increasingly complex non‐profit environment by applying stakeholder theory to managers and their decision‐making in non‐profit theatre organisations (NPTOs). On the surface, this may appear to be ground already covered. Previous research has explored the challenges of achieving more holistic accountability in the face of dominant stakeholders. Approaches have been proposed to increase efficiency, effectiveness and transparency. Less is known about how individual managers respond to competing accountabilities in decision‐making and what factors influence their attention to stakeholder interests. NPTOs operate in both the non‐profit and cultural industries sectors and, as such, are an interesting site to investigate accountability complexity in managerial decision‐making. However, NPTOs (and arts organisations generally) feature little in non‐profit and social accountability research. Particular features of NPTOs amplify the challenges of a multi‐stakeholder environment in discharging accountability. These include artistic mission beyond production/distribution; blended business models; policy‐driven leadership rhetoric; the prevalence of interorganisational collaboration; and a significantly freelance workforce. This study argues that NPTOs are the vanguard of changes in contemporary non‐profit management and their study offers new insights to problems associated with practising accountability within such multi‐stakeholder complexity. By drawing on creative non‐profit organisations, for example NPTOs, this study introduces new knowledge to existing non‐profit and social accountability literatures. Based on transdisciplinary research into perceived inter‐relationships between NPTO managers and stakeholder groups, this study proposes NPTO managers are engaged in a balancing or ‘plate‐spinning’ act of accountability, influenced by dominant stakeholders, and an interdependent triple logic in their operations. They negotiate ambiguous competing expectations by deploying self‐interest and ambiguity, with high potential for managerial paralysis and trade‐off. Recommendations arising include de‐emphasis of efficiency/effectiveness and increased attention to complex multi‐stakeholder accountability beyond current approaches. In addition, it suggests further research into NPTOs and arts organisations could yield additional knowledge in the study of non‐profit accountability.