By Brian Bell

A BSO Historian

There have been excellent board chairmen through the decades, individuals who weighed the needs of artistic integrity with the financial challenges of their times. But the arrangement, both in Boston and elsewhere, is seriously flawed for several reasons: 

— Selection of board members is overwhelmingly based on financial contributions rather than cultural advocacy.

— Since board members invariably come largely from the business community, there is an inclination to treat the orchestra as a struggling enterprise rather than a cultural institution.

— Far too often, financial decisions are based on a trustee’s inclination to have their name put on a building. But is that in the best interests of the orchestra as a whole? After all, an orchestra is roughly 100 people not standing real estate.

I see it as no accident that three of the leading orchestras in the world, the Berlin Philharmonic, the Vienna Philharmonic, and the London Symphony, are all supervised by the musicians themselves. These orchestras show as much or more innovation and leadership than any orchestra that is managed by a board.

The time has come for the BSO musicians, who as a group have a greater understanding of the challenges of maintaining artistic integrity and expanding the relevance of their activities, to take a more active control of their destiny. They need to become active participants in the functioning of the board. In my considered opinion, musicians ignore this plea at their long-term peril.