“We Don't Want to Grow”: How Some Choir Leaders Are Blocking Their Own Future
There’s something quietly tragic about watching a Male Voice Choir resist its own success.
We’ve seen this scene play out too many times: a choir finally tries something bold — project-based recruitment, new repertoire, a branding refresh — and it works. New singers arrive. Energy shifts. There’s momentum. A future.
Then, almost inevitably, the brakes are slammed on. Why?
Because change is uncomfortable. And for some leaders, change is a threat.
In choir after choir, the real obstacle to progress isn’t lack of funding or bad press or even the challenges of age and health — it’s the committee.
Specifically, it’s the small group of well-meaning, stubborn men who guard the gates with white-knuckled hands. Men who have been chairmen, secretaries, treasurers, or uniform officers for decades. Men whose identity is fused with the current structure of the choir. Men who, frankly, don’t want the group to grow — because growth risks them becoming irrelevant.
I call it the “Victor Meldrew phenomenon”: a chorus of little emperors, each presiding over their own patch of perceived relevance. These men are not bad people. They’ve often given years of service. But their leadership has become about preserving, not developing. And that’s a problem.
Let me give you a recent, real-life example.
A regional Male Voice Choir — not a million miles from anywhere — recently enjoyed moderate success with project-based recruitment. Around a dozen new men joined. They brought fresh enthusiasm, some younger voices, and a little buzz into the room. So far, so good.
Then came the big question: Should we renew the lease on our current rehearsal venue?
The musical director — cleverly, and quite rightly — posed this: Is this the right space for us if we want to continue growing? Because the truth was, the room was already full. Any further recruitment would literally be impossible without changing venue.
The committee’s decision?
Stop recruiting
Don’t change the room
New members cause change, and change upsets the current members
Let that sink in.
They were more comfortable with decline than with disruption. More afraid of discomfort than of death. They chose the familiarity of limitation over the risk of possibility.
And this is happening everywhere.
You can spot the signs:
“We like our numbers just as they are”
“It’s hard to integrate new members”
“We don’t want to lose what we have”
“We don’t need to do anything differently — we’re doing fine”
But here’s the uncomfortable truth: you’re not doing fine.
If your choir isn’t evolving, it’s eroding. If your leadership is based on holding ground, not breaking new, then you’re not leading — you’re defending a static monument.
And that static monument? It won’t stand forever.
Good leadership asks: What is best for the choir — not just best for me? True leadership is brave. It welcomes challenge. It celebrates fresh voices, new energy, and yes, occasional discomfort. Because it knows that a choir is not a museum. It is a living organism. And living things must grow — or they die.
We need leaders who are willing to step aside if they’re in the way. Who can see their job not as “preserving the choir I remember” but “building the choir we need”. We need chairmen and committee members who care more about the next generation than the next AGM.
So if you find yourself on a choir committee, ask yourself:
Am I enabling growth, or managing decline?
Is my position more about power than purpose?
Am I comfortable handing over the reins if someone better suited comes along?
Because if the answer is no, you may be the reason your choir isn’t moving forward.
This is a call not to blame — but to reflect. To challenge the status quo, not for the sake of it, but because the status quo is killing choirs.
Let’s stop clinging to the comfort of what we know, and start making bold, brave decisions in service of the music, the members, and the future.
Because choirs don’t need protectors of the past. They need architects of what comes next.
