I have been pondering a lot lately on the concept of “artist management” in the proper sense of the word, or at least what the industry is experiencing. As the music industry evolved, the role of the artist manager must deal with changes in order to evolve as well.
The image of the manager who dictates the directions to take and strategies to use is an image that I think is outdated. “Manager” is rather an ally that is part of the project where the artist must look at his career as a multi-phase project (the concept of releasing an album and make its marketing is in itself a project phase). The “manager” must become a manager of this project.
The role of the project manager, according PMI (Project Management Institute), is “a person assigned by the performing organization [eg artist] to lead the team that is responsible for achieving the project objectives.” Already, this definition changes the role’s dynamics. In this optics, the “Manager” is no longer responsible for the artist but instead responsible to lead the team to achieve the defined objectives. Lead and manage are two distinct concepts. You lead the artist and manage the project.
It therefore becomes important to talk about the maturity of the artist since an artist starting in the industry will not necessarily have the skills to run a business and have the vision for it. In this scenario, it is important that the two components (artist + manager) have some experience to manage a project (project manager) and for the artist to head a performing organization… [To be continued]
These are my first steps with this theory that I shall explore with you. In the next few months, I will elaborate and analyze these two worlds - project management as described by PMI (Project Management Institute) and the music industry.
Source: Artist or Project Management?