Preface for the reader Sophisticated Survival Techniques: Strategies in Art and Economy.
Mari Brellochs / Henrik Schrat (eds.):

Hotel Concerto
Henrik Schrat

GROUP PHOTO

It's hectic on set; props are being moved, the make-up cases are being
unpacked. A group photo is going to be taken. The photographer is setting
up an old plate camera and has already heaped up the fl ash powder. There's
enough time for a quick cigarette. And that's when it happens… Whoosh. Acci-dentally
ignited. Way too much fl ash powder, and nothing was ready. One can
make out something on the plate, which was going to be a group photo - peo-ple
are running around in a frenzy, with their backs to the camera, putting on
make-up. The picture is overexposed anyway. This is how one could see this
reader. The gathering takes place on an outside staircase of a hotel, which we
will speak of later on.

RECIPROCITY

What art discourse regards as ›economy‹ has little to do with the economy and
the image it has of itself. And on the other hand, what is understood as art in
economic discourse rarely corresponds with what experts believe art is. I don't
just mean to say that one fi eld of study's understanding of another fi eld is lim-ited.
Respectable professors of economics apply concepts of art that come from
classic modernism, and important cultural theorists use ideas of economics
that predate the big crash of 1929. This is a shame, but nonetheless common.
Conversely: when reading artists ranting about organisational theory, or econo-mists
dabbling in art, arrogance can conceal important elements. We should
try to approach notions of non-learning with inquisitive respect. They are a
good source of information about the "other". The systems theorist is free to
professionally write about the art system, just as an artist can paint an excellent
portrait of a systems theorist. It becomes a matter of courage and potential
embarrassment when the theorist starts painting and the artist speaks about
systems theory.
In an article in Brand Eins magazine, the artist Armin Chodzinski is quoted:
"Some companies are looking, but they can't fi nd the intellectual potential
[note from the editor: the potential among artists to deal with the economy]. The only
people in the art world who approach topics in a complex way are leftist art-ists,
but no one wants to talk to them, because they think in boring categories
and demonise their opponent." (In an article by Peter Lau, Brand Eins, April 2005, p. 128.)
There is a slight hint, here, of the Frankfurt
School condemning the cultural industry.
For a long time it stood like a monolith, sometimes blocking the view and often
preventing the development of critical tools, which can be used in an economic
system. For art, blatant ignorance is the result. It's almost impossible to get an
insight into management discourse or corporate strategies in order to learn
about processes, which can have extensive social impact. We need to break a
few barriers before we can operate on a deeper level, ask useful questions, and
develop critical tools. This applies to art's engagement with the economy and
vice versa.
One classical area where this does already happen, from time to time, is cre-ativity.
The myth is that this is the artist's skill. On the other hand: who is more
creative than someone who starts a business? There are many artists who work
reproductively, and who are nonetheless successful on the market. It is astonish-ing
the kind of complex tools for creativity in science that have been invented
- in organisations these are referred to as "innovation management". Very few
artists would touch a book about this. Whether this unwillingness to learn is the
arrogant pride of a dying diva, or whether deliberate ignorance can be a cultural
technique, is another question this reader will address. Otherwise, creativity is
not much discussed in this book - this is fertile ground that we leave for later.

REDUCTION AND EXPANSION

"What's not measurable can't be managed." As often as this paradigm may be
scrutinised, it is still one of the key catchphrases of contemporary management.
Reducing ambivalence becomes a necessity, and then becomes a problem. I
do feel slightly awkward, however, that reductionist management is somewhat
getting a beating in this reader, while art is incessantly called back on stage for
another round of applause (and our hands are already sore). In this respect, it's
probably about time to critically investigate the amazing strategic track record
of modern art, and to look at the culturally expanding management discourse
on the other hand.
How about a corny joke? An organisation is like a specialist: it continues to
know more about less, until it knows everything about nothing. Logically, on
the other hand there is art: art always learns across wider fi elds, so keeps accu-mulating
less knowledge about more, until it knows nothing about everything.
Art therefore risks becoming everything, and thereby nothing. Niklas Luh-mann
was under the impression that art had become something that was a
stable system on a meta-level and had advanced system change to a paradigm.
It is possible that this exactly becomes a problem.
I want to come back one more time to the perception art and economy have
of each other. To a certain degree the construction of the counterparty must
surely be created by the observer. There is something touristy about this; just
like the interested visitors in an art gallery, or an artist in an organisation as
tourist in the economy. Whether the artist travels as a hitchhiker and subver-sively
and critically sneaks in, or whether he gets fl own in as a change consul-tant
fi rst class, the photos that he brings back from his trip will be stuck into
albums and passed around. Actually, it's a shame that we don't have get-togeth-ers
with holiday slides anymore. Today, it's "My holiday in the organisation". At
the travel agent's, you can book three weeks work in an organisation over the
counter: I'd like a small business, in Southern Germany if possible in the car
industry. Yes, no problem. But back to the topic, and let's say something about
the project that this reader developed out of.

THE OVERALL PROJECT

Product & Vision is an interdisciplinary project that was developed by the artist
Mari Brellochs and myself, jointly realised with the Kunstfabrik am Flutgraben
e. V. from April to October 2005. More than 16 invited artists and artist groups,
and numerous experts from the fi elds of art, and social and economic science,
from all over Europe are addressing interfaces and separations between art and
economy. The project seeks possibilities for knowledge transfer and synergies,
but also defi nes the boundaries of both fi elds. It benefi ts from the close col-laboration
with Cornelsen (a publishing company for educational media) and
the systemic consulting fi rm osb-i. Cornelsen acts as a model business that the
invitees may engage with, and with which they can develop ideas, comments,
and criticism. This reader is a ›project module‹ that covers the ›text‹ format.
Other formats are exhibition, website, public podium discussions, and round-tables.
In order to get an impression of the overall project, it would be good to
have a look at the exhibition catalogue that will be published after the exhibi-tion
(in September 2005), also by the publishing house Kulturverlag Kadmos.
The catalogue features all the positions and projects that have developed in the
course of Product & Vision.

THE READER AND HOW IT COULD WORK

This publication is not in the position to, and does not want to class any fi elds
scientifi cally. Although some texts do take this stance, it isn't a work of organi-sational,
art historical, or art critical theory. If I said it came closest to a ›piece‹
of art, I would get caught in a trap that I set for myself. Product & Vision is not
an art project, even though it came from that direction. Several different dis-ciplines
have their say, and discuss a relating topic. The basic method of the
overall project, as well as of this reader, is to include different formats - image,
text, performance. It is interesting to see how many different text formats this
reader - as the text-oriented part of the project - incorporates; from an aca-demic
style text with footnotes, to consultants' texts with bullet points and com-pact
sentences, to elaborate and lyric forms of expression. In addition to these
different formats we fi nd scientifi c, corporate, and artistic perspectives. The
reader tries to group together texts from the different fi elds around topics. As
an artist, I would say that it is an exhibition in text format. We are dealing with
a war of discourses - the military term is appropriate here, because this is where
power comes into play.
On this note, it must be emphasised once more that art theorists work differ-ently
to artists. It's similar with entrepreneurs/managers and scientists. Usually,
practitioners don't have the time or the interest to theoretically regulate what
they do. ( It was a significant experience for me when a successful banker spent three months at the Slade School in London as part of my project ›Manager in Residence‹ in 2002. He came to the art college as a visiting professor. Dominic Palfreyman, formerly Global Head of Derivative Trading at West LB,was almost unable to speak about what he did, but, as a person, he communicated the approach to and profi le of ›his world‹ very well. A very direct and performative style of communication therefore developed between him and the students. It was very diffi cult to fi nd a suitable text format that could convey this)

THE CHAPTERS

The texts are grouped into three chapters. The fi rst chapter, Against each other?
Art and Economy, brings together texts that all explicitly address the topic ›art
versus economy‹. In chapter two and three, you will fi nd different disciplines
speaking about similar topics in different ways. Chapter two, With each other.
Learning Ability and its Limitations, introduces material that grapples with the
term ›learning ability‹. During the course of Product & Vision, ›learning ability‹
turned out to be the term that was relevant to all disciplines. The question of
learning starts with the learning ability of the individual and merges into the
learning ability of organisations.
The fact that learning is generally a positive quality is assumed to be normal.
In Buddhism one might think differently about this, or defi ne learning dif-ferently.
The story of Adam and Eve (in the Christian tradition), who were
banned from Eden because they ate from the tree of knowledge, also addresses
this topic. And it wasn't just the shady power-hungry fi gures wanting to torture
their environment with ignorance, who created the link between knowledge
and happiness.
In a conversation between the professor of sculpture Phyllida Barlow and the
art theorist Norman Bryson, Phyllida's cunning comment caused disagreement:
"Books? I only use books to sit on." The idea that an intellectual approach to
art is distracting is widespread amongst artists and spectators. There must be
some truth in the notion that knowledge can suffocate sensibility. Traditionally,
one would speak of wisdom; what one could call a mixture of knowledge and
experience, and their application and sensibility. Optical, tactile, and social
intelligence could be terms used to build a verbal connection, without becom-ing
hostile towards theory.
Chapter three, Of each other. Cultural and social responsibility, is perhaps the hard-est
to outline. One could propose a structural analogy between the history of
art and that of economics. In art, the old questions are: Is the artist interested
in the society, in politics? Does he believe that art can change the world, or is
he making art for art's sake? This can be compared with two basic mindsets
in the history of economics; corporate social responsibility (CSR) is what the
of socially responsible organisations has been called for
some time now. It's irrelevant whether this commitment is regarded as strategi-cally
important for optimising profi t in the long-term, or whether it is seen as
purely philanthropic. On the other hand (and in a way the ›L'art pour l'art‹
argument of economics) there are those who regard profi t as being the only
true and core duty an organisation has. This chapter mainly features people,
who believe that the wider context needs to be incorporated and that the world
has to be altered - if only to improve one's own function.

HOTEL,IN THE EVENING.THE GUESTS.

When putting together this book, I kept having an image of a hotel in my head.
Every author moves into a room, with his text. He returns from a trip and
unpacks. Instruments appear, and everyone starts playing. The walls between
the rooms are thin, and soon we hear a cacophony of sounds. Maybe there is
a wedding, and the couple walks out into the dark park and hears music and
laughter from afar in the illuminated house. We, too, hear this noise and try to
make out melodies. After a while, we go inside to visit the guests in their rooms
to see their instruments. It might seem strange to ask them to play in their
rooms, but experience has taught us what happens when everyone is just put
into an orchestra on stage - we would not get beyond the tuning of the instru-ments.
After just a few hours, the fi rst musicians would leave the stage. This
way we can listen to the guests playing in their own rooms. To try to hear it all
together is up to us for the time being.
If the reader were a hotel, then Gary Day's text is clearly the receptionist, where
we are told how we get to the hotel, where the rooms are, and where the emer-gency
exits are. The text has an cultural historical approach, which starts in the
19 th century, and highlights moments of mutual inspection between culture
and economics. It is important to note that this is a British perspective. From
Adam Smith, to the Arts & Craft movement and William Morris and the institu-tion
Arts & Business, there were always crucial impulses that came from Britain.
Gary Day's view originates from literature and its relationship to the economy.
To illustrate this he refers to F. R. Leavis (1895-1978), who is probably the most
infl uential 20 th century British literary critic and publicist, and his relation with
the economy. Day ends his text with some explicit conclusions about cultural
criticism that keeps becoming more specialised, and on the other hand, man-agement
theory that is becoming more general.
The second text too can be found in the reception area. David Barry is sitting
on the stairs and explains to us that we can also take the elevator together.
Barry is an organisational theorist, who deals in depth with the interferences
between art and organisations. He introduces the term ›mediate‹; an object,
text, or word that takes on the role of a negotiating ›third party‹ that changes
and encourages situations of communication. One could regard this as the
methodological comment on the procedure of this reader, if not on the overall
project Product & Vision, because central topics, and especially the model busi-ness
Cornelsen, take on the role of mediates. At fi rst, people do not talk to each
other, but talk together about something, and this then functions as a bridge.
A mediate could be an artwork, in front of which people stand together, and
which people talk about. Barry however extends this considerably, so that the
object becomes the process, and the players are integrated.

AGAINST EACH OTHER?ART AND ECONOMY

While Gary Day complains about the narrowing of cultural critique, Holger
Kube Ventura shows how it actually happens. He asks the old question: "Is
this art and why should it even be discussed?" And in this case it would be:
"Is organisation art?" It's a matter of power of defi nition and attribution, and
pretty quickly one realises that this old question is central in this context. The
reason for this is that art mainly exists, and becomes effective, because of its
defi nition and the inherent power of defi nition. Given the reductionist art sys-tem,
Ventura doubts whether it is useful to continue using the term ›art‹. He
recognises however, that it makes strategic and logical sense. His text is a clear-sighted,
but specifi c, art theoretical discussion. It does however communicate
one vital thing to the layman; the rules of discourse. Here, he lets the cat out of
the bag, in order to make clear what artists do when they engage with organisa-tions.
Apart from this, it is interesting to me that this text includes an idea that
is otherwise missing a little, namely that of politics and power.
Politics, power, and strategic activities belong together. The contemporary art
market has managed to achieve an incredible strategic success and gain in power
- and management theory is aware of this. This interests Thomas W. Bauer, who
has a background in consulting. In a knowledgeable academic text he investi-gates
the possible use of strategies from art in organisations. He tries to gain
an insight into the working methods of artists, which are often regarded as a
black box.
Bauer distinguishes between ways of interacting with organisations that do not
lead anywhere, and those elements of activities that are worthwhile in relation
to certain practices. He concentrates on "the artistic patterns of action aiming
at changing attitudes and behaviors of the target audience(s) according to the
artists' particular intentions". Symbolisation, intervention, and interaction are
means the artist uses in his cultural innovation strategy. It is in this that Bauer
sees great learning potential for the ›business strategist‹, who could employ
›cultural innovation‹ in order to better ›manage‹ the stakeholders' attitudes
towards the organisation. I already see my colleagues and art experts jumping
up and down at this; either because of anger, or interest in the new job. Even
though the text may not be intended for art discourse, it should be discussed
in that context.
Dirk Baecker's systems theoretical approach to art and economics as "differ-entiated
systems" could make art go slightly mad with its own importance. But
there seem to be internal brakes to prevent this. Baecker places art's function,
which it involuntarily and, at times, reluctantly fulfi ls, at the interface between
communication and consciousness, a space which media and technology can-not
reach. Towards the end of his text, Baecker writes: "Entertainment con-ceals
the difference between communication and consciousness, whereas art
makes it an event".
Peter Hanke's text is entitled "Art beyond entertainment".
There you go! Hanke, director and co-founder of the Centre for Art and Lead-ership
in Copenhagen really starts to bluster. His text is about the all-embracing
cultural and entertainment industries - everything smells of the ›rubbish bin of
consumerism‹. He uses the Renaissance as a point of reference, where exten-sive
penetration of aesthetic understanding, creativity, and economic power
was a given. In opposition to the market and consumerism is education and the
role of the artist; the ethical consultant to society. In the process, he also deals
with the fact that artists are often too lazy and arrogant to really engage with
their opponent. Even though the ›artist-as-ethical-consultant‹ idea makes me
prick up my ears, I do like this blustering - the clashing discourses resonate yet
again, and this is welcome as a basic way of inciting differentiation.
There is always an attempt to establish discourses on a meta-level. Philosophy
believed in it for a very long time. Occidental science long thought it was its
role. And now some want to ascribe it to art. To formally perceive science as
a system amongst others is part of the methodology in this reader. To refi ne
this, we have conducted a little experiment. We are printing eight examples of
abstracts from a relevant conference. (EGOS, 21st European Group for Organizational Studies, Sub-theme 33, Art & Aesthetics and Leadership - of events, projects and institutions, convened by Pierre Guillet de Monthoux, Antonio Strati, Ruth Bereson. Berlin, 2005.)
Scientifi c discourse (with diverse focal points) dealing with art and econom-ics
has grown immensely in the past years. Olga Belova's input, which was the
selection and presentation of the abstracts, provides a snapshot here. Judging
by the structure, the conference is an academic format, with certain norms
and opportunities. The abstracts are good pointers showing the mindsets and
reservations of current science, and at the same time they highlight the ›con-ference‹
format.
Artist Kent Hansen writes in an academic style and lists a number of misunder-standings,
myths, and lies that are common in the mutual inspection. "Correla-tive
practice" is what Hansen calls the optimum outcome of artists working with
organisations. He focuses on the modifi cation of conditions of communication
within organisations. Attaining a ›void‹ and ›silence‹ as a precondition for indi-viduals
in an organisation to seek new approaches to communication is central
here. The connection to the label ›democratic innovation‹, under which Han-son
unites his activities, is evident. The role that he assigns to ›working arte-facts‹
is especially interesting - using conventional references to physical and
visual qualities of artworks. These working artefacts seem to me related to, what
David Barry calls, mediates.
Martin Ferro-Thomsen, who introduces the term ›Organisational Art‹ (OA),
draws on Hansen's project "Industries of Vision". By OA, Ferro-Thomsen refers
to interventions and collaborations of artists in organisations. Whereas con-sultants
are focussed on problems, artists tend to point towards possibilities.
This creates a learning relationship, which (ideally) improves self-diagnosis
and eventually leads to the ability of an organisation to solve its problems on its
own. Through working with an organisation, art in turn wins one more piece of
reality, a piece of ›real life‹. "Context is half the work," the axiom of the Artist
Placement Group, is also important to him, when dealing with the defi nition of
this particular area of artistic practice. Ferro-Thomsen believes there is learn-ing
potential for both sides in this practice. This makes him a perfect transition
point to move on to the second group in this reader, the one we have dedicated
to ›learning ability‹.

WITH EACH OTHER.LEARNING ABILITY AND ITS LIMITATIONS

Learning and teaching are an exciting couple. Learning can be a self-deter-mined
activity, while teaching is culturally determined, or even related to the
complex concept of civilisation.
Mari Brellochs uses Cornelsen as an example, by quoting the company's slogan
"Education is the most important human investment you can make", and ques-tions:
"What is education? What sort of people, what idea of man (that one could
and should be investing in) is Cornelsen referring to/are we referring to? And
what is an investment?" By asking and interlinking the questions like this, Brellochs switches the headlights on, and we realise that there is quite swampy ter-rain
ahead. ›Education as investment‹ - let us keep in mind what Gary Day said
about management discourse and language. Brellochs takes it one step further;
he introduces artists as specialists for metaphors and images. This makes them
responsible, but also opens up an opportunity to connect these specialists for
the irrational, the a-functional, and the emotional to organisations, in order to
change these and to cope with the growing challenges of the environment. The
next text in the reader also hopes to achieve this, by establishing selective and
systematic commitment that is inherent in the activity called ›learning‹.
Torsten Groth, a social scientist with a long list of publications about manage-ment
theory to his name, brings up the American organisational theorist Karl
Weick. What on earth is this text doing here? I had planned to launch into a
lengthy explanation here, but decided instead to build up the suspense. I won't
say anything apart from that this could be the key text of the reader. It allows
for a whole range of things from other texts to be re-positioned in relation to
each other. Following an old method, one only needed to replace the word
›organisation‹ with the word ›culture‹, or even ›art‹, for example. I can guaran-tee
that the knowledge gain would not be insubstantial.
With Rudolf Wimmer's text we then concentrate entirely on learning ability. The
scientist and consultant illustrates limitations, problems, and conditions, which
organisations that are capable of learning face from a systemic point of view. He
believes an organisation is capable of learning, when it disposes of open ›deci-sion-
making processes‹ (in its internal processes, as well as in its contacts with
the outside world) in order to use certain irritations as learning impulses, or
ignore them. Understanding one's own, at times unconscious, learning, is indis-pensable.
Communication structures play a crucial role in this, because commu-nicative
negotiation processes are supposed to lead to "collectively supported
problem solving, possibly by all the members and units of the organisation".4
Bernard Krusche and Reinhart Nagel transfer what Wimmer develops theo-retically,
into action. Krusche and Nagel, consultants with a systemic approach,
speak about the distinct "tools" you need to utilise in an organisation before you
can get any information about its learning ability, and change it. The authors
write the wonderful sentence: "If one doesn't make mistakes, one can't learn"
and encourage meaningful use of both learning and non-learning. Whether
the topic is human resources management, processing of mistakes, or leader-ship
coalition, Krusche and Nagel speak their mind. The text is divided into
numbered paragraphs no longer than ten lines that in turn feature lists of bullet points. The text that follows is composed of questions and contributions of
fi ve artists/artist groups who are part of Product & Vision. Whereas organisations
need tools and courage to engage with mistakes and see them as learning oppor-tunities,
artistic learning seems more personal and also less transferable.


OF EACH OTHER.CULTURAL AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

The last chapter starts off with a conversation. The artists Armin Chodzinski
and Enno Schmidt speak to critic and curator Konstantin Adamopoulos. Their
language, attitude, and every twist in the sentences and their meanings, reveals
multiple approaches. Adamopoulos asks questions in a gentle and intelligent
way. Chodzinski introduces Bourdieu's distinction between economic and sym-bolic
capital, and plays with different meanings of effi ciency. We notice a pro-found
distrust towards the economy and the art market and how they function
today. But it is important to think about economics and organisations in cultural
terms. A certain fatalism can't be denied, but there is also a friendly and visionary
energy. Enno Schmidt's text, which follows the conversation, directly addresses
corporate social responsibility (CSR). He complains about the death of other-wise
good ideas, when CSR is condensed into programmes and ISO norms are
just part of settling accounts. Before he presents some case studies, he warms
up by saying: "The economy is created through productive charity". When they
do it properly this is what organisations' core ability should be. Exactly! I notice
with delight that Schmidt, who draws on Rudolf Steiner, brings a completely
different vocabulary to the reader. Spiritual dimensions (also in vogue in man-agement
discourse at the moment) had so far been avoided, and the idea of
›alternative economies‹ is not really addressed - these could be areas for a fol-low-
up project. Enno Schmidt speaks of giving something away as a present as
a gesture that forms culture.
CSR is also Claus Noppeney's main interest. Noppeney, an economist, briefl y
gives an overview of the history of ideas that were the basis for the development
of CSR. If the (classic) motto "the social responsibility of business is to increase
profi ts" applies, then CSR is redundant, because ethics and business become
one. The market is still often referred to as an all-regulating mechanism. It is
about time - at least CSR is a sign of this - that this view was revised and packed
away, to join all the other historical thought systems. Although many of the PR-geared
CSR programmes of organisations are rather embarrassing, a cultural
rethinking is taking place, which is more than a fashionable trend. The idea
that one has to be aware of the cultural environment, and understand it, is at
the core of the next text.
Family therapist and organisational consultant Fritz B. Simon starts his text by
explaining how culture is defi ned on different levels. He goes on to establish
detailed rules constituting culture, and slowly narrows down the focus to get to
the organisation and how it embeds itself culturally. How is an organisation, as
social system, linked to its (cultural) environment? Relative to these rules and
those who understand them, how does an organisation position itself and func-tion?
This is where art could come into play. Simon proposes that art is the one
tool that can visualise the cultural rules an organisation abides by. Whatever
happens naturally, like brushing your teeth every day, for example, is not visu-alised
as a rule. Because art acts at the edge of these rules, and according to its
defi nition violates boundaries, it can be a valid way to comprehend the cultural
environment and act accordingly.
The artist Ruediger John also believes that this kind of embedding leads to
meaningful change. He calls it ›critical aesthetic coaching‹, and for him it
advances the creation of values and the capacity for awareness inside an organ-isation.
John relates this method of working back to art, and uses the term
›systemic art‹ to mark a modifi cation in the meaning of art. It is interesting
to link this to Kube Ventura's text. John has a polemical undertone. He feels
pressured, wants to intervene - this concerns him personally. He behaves com-pletely
like an artist, but is clever enough not to get caught in post-Marxist
critique. The critical meaning remains intact however - and is combined with
aesthetics. It is said that there are as many defi nitions for aesthetics as there are
people who speak about it. It is of course important to question whether the
term ›aesthetic‹ is still relevant to what we call art; whether it can be located
somewhere else, whether it is still useful as a tool at all.
The term's fl exibility is what could make it appealing again. It may be useful to have a look at Wendelin Küpers's text, because it grapples in depth with the dragon that is ›aesthetics‹,
or look at the course that ›Organisational Aesthetics‹ is taking, which is not
really represented in this reader. (What strikes one is his excessive use of footnote, which suggests a fi ght and desire inherent in the format. He spins a tale, gets tangled up and wrestles with the sprawling language and the academic
tradition that he comes from. A good image for Wendelin Merlin Küpers is perhaps: a person sitting
in a pitch-black forest, chained to the rock of philosophy, hitting the chains with every rock he can
reach. The sparks that are created slowly illuminate the forest. A dragon called Aesthetics appears.
I'm not sure how this story continues. The dragon could eat Küpers, or Küpers could cast a spell on
the dragon, or the two of them could go for a drink and start a business together.)
Wendelin Küpers is the person in this reader, who - in phenomenological terms
- supports aesthetics the most. Aesthetic approaches, which have ›functionless
functions‹, can help to query procedures of instrumental rationality, and rebuild
established routines of economic life. This idea becomes more dense when
Küpers comes to talk about the ›responsive‹ encounter between art and econ-omy,
and about a ›difference-sensitive relationship formation process‹ "whereby
the differences fi rst come to exist". The way different materials are worked with
(marble reacts differently to chalk) defi nes the procedures. The artist has to listen to the material. It is through this sort of dialogue, and ›responsive practice‹
that Küpers expects an ›overload of added value‹. And this excess could create
a vision of civil society.
The philosopher Matt Statler, who works in the fi eld of organisational research
and consulting, draws on the classic Greek differentiation between science (epis-teme)
and practical wisdom (phronesis). Statler describes the limits in com-prehension
that science is facing today, and calls for a re-evaluation of practi-cal
wisdom within management discourse. ›Value-free management theory‹ is
increasingly falling into disrepute. This is evidenced in the cited title of the
article "Bad management theories destroy good management practice". Statler
refers once more to the Greeks when he writes that Plato considered gymnas-tics
and music as educational foundations for leaders, while Aristotle attached
great importance to drama. What they have in common, and this is where his
text comes full circle, is that play, serious play is a means to teach practical
wisdom. It could re-balance the disproportion that has been created by reduc-tionist
management theory and its effect on the economy. Pierre Guillet de
Monthoux is also sure this will be the case. Mechanistic management theory is
history - just about interesting in Russia and China! It's a slightly melancholic
little story - which he presents singing, of course - and it concludes this reader.
It's a story about the role that he played in an artwork. The management pro-fessor
as performance - watching the old management turned into art, and
musealised - himself doubtful about what art was doing there. It's good to hear
this, after everything that has been credited to art in the course of this reader.
I have to study Kube Ventura again and fi nd out whether we shouldn't just let
art be art, and send management theory off into the Russian winter, so that we
can fi nd out what would result from joint activity. ›Practical wisdom‹ is a great
term, and could be the leitmotif. But to tell deterministic art and economy to
sod off is not an easy thing to do. And my guess is that these two still have some
serious reproduction mechanisms at hand. The playing fi eld is still open, but if
this means working with such fantastic people as those who have participated
in this reader, I'm really looking forward to it. I'm actually feeling a little peck-ish
now, so I think I'll go downstairs to the hotel bar and check if I can still get
a sandwich. Maybe there is some progress on the group photo, and the photo-grapher
has inserted a new plate.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Mari Brellochs and I want to thank all those committed people, who have
contributed to the realisation of this reader - especially the authors for their
energy and willingness to participate, for accepting the communication mara-thons,
translation diffi culties, and editing of texts. We want to thank all those
who advised us (the list is way too long). Bernhard Krusche's suggestions and
mediation were decisive to the structure of the reader. Special thanks goes to
the team that coordinated the production of the reader - being called the
editors gives us a really bad conscience. Without Franziska Eidner's active
and versatile commitment, Thomas Klauck's calm and intelligent editing, and
Svenja Moor's preciseness in proof-reading, this reader would never have been
realised. Thanks to Lorna Neuber who translated texts from English with her
newborn baby on her arm, thanks also to Andrea Wilhelm and Marit Münzberg
[abstracts] - without any newborn. Sophie von Olfers and Paul Compton had
the diffi cult task of translating the texts from German into English, and Joshua
Dilworth and Martin Vogl proofed the English texts. The Kunstfabrik am Flut-graben
was our host, and Kulturverlag Kadmos enters new territory by publish-ing
this book in two languages. Thank you.