Pros
I met dedicated and passionate people who felt as frustrated as I was at the job due to the poor management of the ED and the worthless board
Cons
Board treats staff like they know better when the staff has more relevant education and experience actually working in non-profits then the entire board put together. Plus not one board member can say they brought in any new sponsors since the company almost went bankrupt. In fact they are repeating many of the same mistakes. The board micromanages staff, yet blames past staff members for their financial difficulties with and air of "well they are only non-profit employees - if they were smart they would be working in the for profit sector." Former Board Chair Ernest Butler wrote a magazine article stating as much. The board needs to realize they were as much to blame for the company almost going under as anyone. They were involved in and approved every decision leading up to the near bankruptcy (or as they call it financial reorganization), but take no culpability at all. Instead they hired an ED with very little management experience (mid-level development guy from NYC) who caters to board while the organization remains entrenched in the opera of the past and pays lip service to actual community involvement. They also hire staff for key positions as well as independent contractors from out of state because they think poor little old Austin doesn't already have qualified people living in the city. So once again it is that "someone else knows better" mentality only instead of board vs staff it is New York vs Austin. They hire development people from out of state who have no Austin connections and give them unrealistic financial goals for an outsider. Executive Director has no leadership skills. He can only suck up to board and make staff do an unbelievable amount of work that usually produces no result. He has no respect for work/life balance and will expect you to be on call during the weekends and after hours. The high turnover rate in key roles (Development, Marketing and Communications, Education), speaks volumes What also speaks volumes is the amount of positions that split between two important jobs. The education director is also the stage manager. How can Austin opera expect people to want to support their education initiatives when they do not feel it is important enough to be a full-time job. How AO say they have incredible production value, when their production manager only does that job part-time. If the answer is because they cannot afford to have those roles as full-time positions (which I imagine is the case), then they are in more trouble then they are letting on. Another example - they cannot blame lack of ticket sales on the person they hire to do the job (who is normally from out of state), when the person in said position only does it part-time, and they continually cut the budget for marketing. And if the answer is that they have to cut marketing dollars because they do not have enough money in the budget, then once again, I say beware. I finally wrote this review because I was tired of them luring accomplished and perfectly lovely people from other states, promising them a job opportunity that will not pan out. People from out of state need to be warned to stay away from Austin Opera. This is how I feel and I left on good terms. Imagine what people think who were let go.......