Does the best always win – a beautiful illusion? Can the insights that American economist Toby Stuart presents in his book “Anointed” about the corporate world be applied to classical music?

Thesis 1: Status is more important than innovation

T. Stuart: Status often matters more than actual innovation. Funding does not necessarily flow to the best product, but to the one that appears the most “shiny.”

Transfer to classical music: Audiences do not always attend concerts for the artistically strongest interpretation, but frequently for the names currently being talked about — made visible through PR, marketing, and media presence. Not necessarily the most enduringly famous, but those under current discussion shape the perception of relevance.

Thesis 2: The power of a seal of approval

T. Stuart: Once a person or company receives a “seal of approval” from a highly respected authority, it signals quality to the market — an anointing that endures, even when the difference to others is minimal or later becomes relative.

Transfer to classical music: Anyone who has won a major prize, debuted in a famous hall, received praise in the cultural press, or performed with a renowned orchestra often benefits from this “anointing” for a lifetime. It functions like a trust bonus: even weaker performances tend to be forgiven because audiences rely on an established narrative. The subtle nuances that truly place someone at the top are difficult for many listeners to assess objectively — the seal of approval then replaces differentiated perception.

Thesis 3: The Matthew Effect

T. Stuart: “Matthew Effect: to those who have, more will be given.” Once at the top, individuals often gain first access to the most promising projects.

Transfer to the classical world: Those who have established a strong market status are repeatedly approached first. This is understandable — presenters, agencies, and partners want to benefit from existing success and thereby minimize risk.

Thesis 4: The lack of measurability

T. Stuart: Selection based purely on performance is an illusion. Performance is often hard to measure clearly, so people rely on status signals instead. Networks reinforce this effect: those already inside help decide who is allowed in.

Transfer to the classical world: Determining who truly plays “better” is often difficult. As a result, many decision-makers rely on well-known names or existing networks. The resulting advantage accumulates: more visibility leads to more engagements, which in turn lead to even more visibility — making it increasingly difficult for others to catch up.

Toby Stuart argues that many small advantages accumulate over time. These “anointings” steadily widen the gap between individuals. Not only performance matters, but also the sum of signals that are interpreted as quality.

In relation to classical music, this raises several questions: What role do presenter, venue, repertoire, and performer play in shaping audience perception? Do listeners prefer the “anointed,” or are they willing to take risks and discover something new? And if the first tendency prevails — how could this cycle be broken? There is a reason people say that selling the first ticket is the hardest — not the thousand-and-first.

The willingness to bear so-called “change costs” is very low. A listener would rather spend 60 euros on a concert in a familiar venue, with a familiar performer and familiar repertoire, than 20 euros on a concert full of unknowns. They might choose differently if curiosity and risk tolerance were stronger. At Moving Classics, we try to spark this curiosity through our curated selection of new works, encouraging audiences to explore new developments in classical music.