Time in Market: the hidden factor

We've all been there. You are working on a marketing campaign and you are up to your elbows in the things that you can see in front of you; debating subjectively about the creative execution, agonizing about the words, trying to get the 'messaging' right (on a side note why is this not just 'the message'?) or we might have been debating the media mix; digital, social, press, radio etc and the various merits of each.

All the while the one unseen variable and perhaps the most crucial variable slips silently by... time.

When I worked in the arts we had time-in-market down to a T, for all but the most exciting of performances, if you were not in market for a minimum of four weeks, ideally six, you simply did not have enough time in market for the public to find out about it, talk to friends and family about going, ruminate, waste time and then finally purchase tickets. If it was four weeks you needed to spend way more money than you did over six too for the same effect.

Now at the University my time frames are much longer but time-in-market is no less critical.

One of the best gigs I worked on, in terms of understanding this, was Yes Prime Minister, the stage show. We were in market nearly somewhere between 10-12 months out. We went on soft sale, did a groups launch but otherwise we just generally left it there, sitting on the website, postered up in the foyer, flyers on racks. And you know what, it just ticked away selling in dribs and drabs and when it finally came to planning and mounting a campaign we had a solid pool of tickets already sold. 

Another element of timing is to put work into what is called 'flighting' its when you think about your peaks and through in your marketing spend. No one can afford to shout at the same volume 100% of the time, you get hoarse and your audience tunes out. Better to think about when you want to be loud, when you want to be quiet. Just like a good Pixies/Nirvana song quiet/loud/quiet/loud done artfully.

The things that eat into time-in-market are, 

• lack of awareness as to when time is slipping away and a subsequent lack or urgency.
• lack of pre-planning, thinking ahead of time how much time you need to get sorted with your campaign in order to be in market for the ideal time. (DId I say the word 'time' enough just then? Here it is again TIME!)
• the 'perfect being the enemy of the good' thing. When you prioritise going for that fifth or sixth creative concept because the others had 'not quite nailed it'. I'm here to tell you, better to be in the market for the perfect amount of time with a 70% creative, than have perfect creative but for too short amount of time.

Anyway something to think about and consider when planning your campaigns. Maybe you can study your own past campaigns and see if there's a pattern or optimal time-in-market. One benefit is that in an increasingly digital world you can get out into market faster than ever before in some mediums. I have often begun campaigns on Facebook and other social and digital mediums simply because I could get that out quickly and then buy the breathing space to work on other executions.

If you do have some 'perfect is the enemy of the good' stakeholders, you need to work with them to get them to understand the importance of time-in-market, although admittedly some will never get it and happily fiddle while Rome burns down.

Alright that's enough from me, sorry it's been a while since my last post, hopefully I'll get my blogging mojo back and it won;'t take me so much TIME to blog again!

The Skywhale and social media

Recently we Canberrans witnessed that most rarest of beasts, an artistic undertaking with genuine cut-through into the mainstream and massive social media buzz. 

I speak of course of the Skywhale. (Video here )



The major artistic commission for the Centenary of Canberra, this incredibly bold and successful artwork was revealed over the last few weeks to an unsuspecting Canberra public and boy did it get people talking! And not just locally, nationally and internationally as well.

I've posted a list of the coverage below but from the UK, to Europe, Lebanon, Brazil, China and beyond the reach of this work across social media, MSM and more was truly staggering.

But my interest was less about do I like it (yes), do I think its successful public art (yes) and do I think its value for money (yes) but more about whether the work was commissioned in part because of the social and MSM stir it was likely to cause, (and whether any artistic director would ever openly admit this possibility!) or was it purely the result of brave artistic decision making and the coverage followed.

I am also interested in exploring if factoring in "conversation-start-ability" from the outset is good (us marketing types are always pleading for more consideration of audience at the early stages of artistic creation) or unwise (in that it may led to compromised artistic decisions or doing things for the wrong reasons).

I posed the question of being motivated by the possibility of a 'buzz' from the start to Robyn Archer, Artistic Director of the Centenary, amazingly she responded to my within 24 hours with a very considered response. I publish her full response here:

“I am wholly familiar with media attention of this order. I commissioned Rafael Lozano Hemmer for a major work at Federation Square for The Light in Winter. Entitled Solar Equation, it had worldwide coverage in old and new media. We were delighted in the role that social media played in extending the conversation about that work beyond just Fed Square , Melbourne and Australia. We quantified it at around A$4.2 million. So I’m aware that this kind of interest can happen. At no time do I  aim for this. Others may  feel the need to consider either markets or reactions, but I don’t.  

When I have the privilege of commissioning new works from internationally recognised artists, the only aim is to invite them to use their immense skills and creative powers to bring a new work into the world. For the Centenary, composer Andrew Schultz researched and was inspired by the Canberra story for Symphony No 3: Century, visual artist Jyll Bradley was inspired by Canberra’s history and love of trees for City of Trees , choreographer Garry Stewart has researched and been inspired by  Aldo Giurgola’s democratic Griffin-inspired approach to New Parliament House for the new ballet, Monument, which will premiere end May, and Patricia Piccinnini has launched her next major sculpture, The Skywhale, which is not only a continuation of the themes of evolution which permeate all her works, but was inspired by Patricia’s years growing up in Canberra where she perceived an ‘artificial city’ set in a natural landscape: she has created an ‘artifical’ , yet in evolutionary terms quite imaginable, creature to fly ( this is a very great feat) in a natural landscape. It evokes so many thoughts, if people are just able to open their minds, lift their curiosity, and use The Skywhale to stimulate their imaginations. If lifeforms, like whales, had not turned back to the sea to evolve and adapt, they might have gone into the air, and something like The Skywhale might have emerged - it is no ‘uglier’ than a camel or a rhinocerous might appear if you’d never seen one before.

 Also I love to consider Canberra as the ‘artificial city’ now having grown into a real city: The Skywhale first appeared as an artificial creature, but amongst her millions of followers ( the coverage has now reached more than thirty countries, hundreds of media outlets, and many thousands of social media responses) she is already ‘real’. I’m also delighted that Canberra is now known by so many more people throughout the world, and known again for its courage in boldness and innovation ( as it was in 1912 for choosing an unlikely winner for its design in Walter Burley Griffin) ; and that the name of the Canberra raised and educated artist Patricia Piccinnini  has spread throughout the nation, and the world, through this commission.”

So there you have it in the most eloquent and verbose of terms - No Archer does not pre-suppose reactions to a work when curating artistic output. And I for one firmly believe her.

But this work is a visual art piece and most of my readers (yes there ARE some I'm told!) come from the performing arts realm. Interested in a theatre programmer's response to the Skywhale and the central premise of considering conversation-start-ability from the outset I asked Simon Hinton CEO and AD of Merrigong Theatre Company, one of the best thinkers in business and a good mate for his thoughts.

"I honestly can't say I've ever really thought about a work "that's sure to get some twitter / facebook chatter". I do think the natural focus is on securing the best artists to make and show the most exciting work they can, and hope the response and it's echoes take care of themselves. I do think though that the worst thing for a programmer is a lack of audience response. I don't mean a lack of bums on seats (though that's also obviously a problem), I mean that sometimes we don't get a good box office response but the audience that does come has a big response to the work - whether positive or negative - and I guess then we know we have connected with them.

Social media is really just an extension of word of mouth, which has always been our most important marketing tool. Silence is, I guess, the worst possible response - we need people to react one way or the other, to have a way of gauging success. We are starting to have more internal conversations about identifying works that we think are great but almost impossible to communicate to an audience - you know, "those that come will love it, but how do we make them understand that they will love it?". These are the shows that really need the social media response.

 I would see Sky Whale as a huge success - it got a big response, and given the conceptual nature of the work, debate about what it means, what is its worth as a piece of art etc. is the desired response. I would see that as "mission accomplished". The "what a waste of money" crowd won't ever understand that their response is kind of the point - in debating the merits of the work, they've contributed to helping define who we are, what we value as a society etc. The irony, I guess, is that in trying to attack the work, they unwittingly make it successful, not only in being part of the desired debate, but of course in bringing attention to it in social media, which is now always echoed in MSM."

So there you have it make brave artistic choices that connect with people and the world will beat a path to your door and in the age of social media they will beat that path faster than ever.

SKYWHALE COVERAGE INCLUDES (not a complete list!):

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Skywhale

BBC News: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-22478812

Gulf News: http://gulfnews.com/news/world/other-world/gigantic-skywhale-splits-opinion-in-australia-1.1182066

Huffington Post France: http://www.huffingtonpost.fr/2013/05/10/montgolfiere-skywhale-patricia-piccinini_n_3251825.html?utm_hp_ref=france

Lavenir.net (France): http://www.lavenir.net/article/detail.aspx?articleid=DMF20130510_00308495

Liberation (France): http://www.liberation.fr/culture/2013/05/12/une-baleine-flotte-sur-canberra_902343

Daily Star Lebanon: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/Culture/Art/2013/May-11/216685-aussie-opinion-split-over-the-skywhale.ashx#axzz2T7xGch9V

Australiatimes.com.uk: http://www.australiantimes.co.uk/news/in-australia/canberra-skywhale-birthday-balloon-floats-into-critical-storm.htm

Telegraph UK: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/10048688/Canberras-Skywhale-splits-opinion.html

CNN: http://travel.cnn.com/monstrous-skywhale-hot-air-balloon-takes-skies-canberra-747281

Bigpond news: http://bigpondnews.com/articles/OddSpot/2013/05/11/Canberrans_flock_to_see_Skywhale_fly_871301.html

Metafilter: www.metafilter.com/127918/Meet-the-Skywhale

Upi.com: http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2013/05/09/Giant-whale-balloon-celebrates-Canberras-centenary/UPI-51721368126953/

ABC Norway: http://www.abcnyheter.no/nyheter/2013/05/12/skywhale-splitter-australia

Designyoutrust.com: http://designyoutrust.com/2013/05/the-skywhale/

News24.com: http://www.news24.com/Travel/International/Skywhale-slammed-as-wasterful-20130510

Stromfront.com (white pride world wide): http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t965993/

Heart Radio Bristol: http://www.heart.co.uk/bristol/news/local/skywhale-inflates-west/

Live Leak: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=149_1368236839

Getty images: http://www.google.com/hostednews/getty/article/ALeqM5jOXajVgMMFdHimG39eUJnOlTQraA?docId=168532563

iPress.hr (Croatia): http://www.ipress.hr/magazin/kontroverzni-skywhale-poletio-iznad-canberre-27435.html

New Tang Dynasty Television: http://ntdtv.org/en/news/world/asia/2013-05-11/giant-flying-whale-seen-over-canberra-on-100th-anniversary.html

News Talk ZB (New Zealand): http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/nbint/1072443119-big--busty-whale-takes-to-canberra-s-skies

Metro UK (best news pics from around the world): http://metro.co.uk/2013/05/10/gallery-window-on-the-world-10th-may-2013-3754501/

Wow Keren (Indonesia): http://www.wowkeren.com/berita/tampil/00035039.html

Die Welt (Germany): http://www.welt.de/print/die_welt/debatte/article116075457/Australisches-Flugobjekt.html

GI (Brasil) http://g1.globo.com/mundo/noticia/2013/05/canberra-ganha-balao-de-ar-quente-gigante-para-comemorar-centerario.html

International Business Times (Japan): http://jp.ibtimes.com/articles/44047/20130511/305064.htm

Thanh Niem (Vietnam) http://www.thanhnien.com.vn/pages/20130512/khinh-khi-cau-ca-voi.aspx

De Redeactie.be (Belgium): http://www.deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/videozone/ookdatnog/MV_130511_R_skywhale%2B%2B

Hoboktn (Russia): http://www.novosti.rs/vesti/naslovna/reportaze/aktuelno.293.html:433165-Dzinovska-kornjaca-za-100-godisnjicu-Kanbere

Novinky(Czech Republic): http://www.novinky.cz/koktejl/301597-nemravny-balon-s-poprsim-preletel-australii-provokoval-lidi.html

Schwabische(Germany): http://www.schwaebische.de/journal/vermischtes/aus-aller-welt_artikel,-Kunstwerk-als-Wal-mit-zehn-Bruesten-verunglimpft-_arid,5435857.html

World Journal (China): http://www.worldjournal.com/view/full_news/22546742/article-%E6%BE%B3%E9%A6%96%E9%83%BD%E7%99%BE%E6%AD%B2-%E9%80%81%E5%A4%A9%E9%AF%A8%E5%8D%87%E7%A9%BA?instance=news_pics

National

Mamamia: http://www.mamamia.com.au/news/amanda-berry-rescue/

News.com.au: http://www.news.com.au/travel/australia/look-up-in-the-sky-its-what-is-that-thing-skywhale-balloon-marks-canberra-anniversary/story-e6frfq89-1226638931846

Daily Telegraph: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/why-whale-over-an-ugly-turtle-full-of-hot-air/story-fni0cwl5-1226640612585

Courier Mail: http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=15&ved=0CG0QFjAO&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.couriermail.com.au%2Fnews%2Fbreaking-news%2Fcanberrans-flock-to-see-skywhale-fly%2Fstory-e6freono-1226639855785&ei=qS-QUauJN6Kbigfr84Eo&usg=AFQjCNHG9pGjdfhZlADffht0xv3EB0sJnQ&bvm=bv.46340616,d.aGc

The Age: http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=15&ved=0CG0QFjAO&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.couriermail.com.au%2Fnews%2Fbreaking-news%2Fcanberrans-flock-to-see-skywhale-fly%2Fstory-e6freono-1226639855785&ei=qS-QUauJN6Kbigfr84Eo&usg=AFQjCNHG9pGjdfhZlADffht0xv3EB0sJnQ&bvm=bv.46340616,d.aGc

Perth Now: http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=12&ved=0CDEQFjABOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.perthnow.com.au%2Fnews%2Fbreaking-news%2Fcanberrans-flock-to-see-skywhale-fly%2Fstory-fnhrvfuw-1226639855785&ei=RDCQUfnUN6KsiAeXzYD4CA&usg=AFQjCNFZGyeHfbL696qsd_FHp7wR5H2v4Q&bvm=bv.46340616,d.aGc

SMH: http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=14&ved=0CDoQFjADOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.smh.com.au%2Fphotogallery%2Fact-news%2Fcanberra-centenary%2Fthe-centenary-of-canberra-skywhale-20130510-2jbq7.html%3FselectedImage%3D3&ei=RDCQUfnUN6KsiAeXzYD4CA&usg=AFQjCNFJMoIG5Ui_ulIr3xkmFKPXWFb_7Q&bvm=bv.46340616,d.aGc.

MSN: http://now.msn.com/skywhale-balloon-has-canberra-buzzing-170k-price-tag

Sky News: http://www.skynews.com.au/offbeat/article.aspx?id=871301

Yahoo 7: http://au.gwn7.yahoo.com/w3/lifestyle/entertainment/a/-/entertainment/17096192/skywhale-price-tag-could-hit-300k/

Fairfax regional: http://www.thecourier.com.au/story/1494424/skywhale-over-canberra/?cs=70

Artshub: http://au.artshub.com/au/news-article/news/arts/canberra-has-a-whale-of-a-time-as-skywhale-sets-off-195307

Australia glory: http://www.australiaglory.com/news/act-doesnt-own-skywhale

Urban dictionary: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Skywhale&defid=7049053

UnexplainedMysteries.com: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Skywhale&defid=7049053

Local

Riotact: http://the-riotact.com/its-maybe-for-skywhale-monday/1037193

Riotact: http://the-riotact.com/the-skywhale-unveil/103631

Riotact: http://the-riotact.com/the-rise-of-the-skywhale/103686

Blogs:

Blondeinc: http://blondeink.net/?p=2921

Sykose.com: http://sykose.com/2013/05/09/udderly-delightful-sky-whale-destined-for-canberra/

In The Taratory: http://inthetaratory.wordpress.com/2013/05/11/skywhale-launch/

Oztypewriter: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Skywhale&defid=7049053

666: http://blogs.abc.net.au/canberra/2013/05/sollys-satirical-sing-a-long-skywhale-work-of-art-or-eyesore-.html

Aust Perf Arts Centres: How we failed and don't even realise it

Canberra recently hosted three performing arts conferences, the APACA Forum, The Australia Council's Marketing Summit and the Australian Theatre Forum.

I attended parts of each forum and it was during the middle of the week that it dawned on me, the subset of the performing arts industry that I work in (Government funded venues) have almost universally failed in our mission to be centres of creativity and culture for our respective communities and what's more, no one even realises this or even cares.

This is a pretty sweeping and damning statement and I make it not to pour scorn on the many, many dedicated professionals all over the country who are fighting the good fight and trying their best, I say that we have failed only because our overarching eco-system is fundamentally flawed.

Let me start with what I believe every subsidised venue across the country was probably designed for.

Pre WWII, there was no such thing as a performing arts centre, towns and cities had town halls, larger ones had commercial theatres and schools and universities had theatre spaces too. Their were thriving audiences for the works of JC Williamson, small touring opera companies and popular vaudeville entertainment. 

Over the course of the Twentieth Century audiences for live performing arts were eroded by new initiatives, recorded sound, radio, movies, television, video and the Internet. People still saw something special in the art of live entertainment but it's numbers declined to the point where these forms of art began to disappear from our communities. So Governments did what Governments usually do when popular markets fail, they intervene in the hope that there is a vote in it.

And so this idea began to take hold, old run down Town Halls were gradually replaced by new state-of-the-art Performing Arts Centres, a couple in the Sixties, a few more in the Seventies and a veritable flood throughout the land as bicentennial projects in the Eighties. But why? Why build such structures?

For most Governments the stated rationale is "To create a place where the community can come together and share culture and experiences" .

Now this is where I believe most venue have failed especially those Council funded venues. Leaving aside the number of nights of community hire (Not because it not important, it is and should definitely be a KPI, but because Centre's don't have to do anything to get them other that offer a rate), you would be flat out finding a venue in the country that devoted any more than 15% of its activity to genuine community engagement programs - by this I mean the commissioning of local works, education programs, community out reach programs and the like. What should be the main gain for Arts Centres has become the sideline, the thing we do when we have time and spare money.

We sell our venues out to anyone who wants to rent them and stand up comics and licensed cartoon characters with foam heads swing through town and take our money and leave. But what of our subscription seasons you ask? Well I cannot see much difference between a touring show funded by Playing Australia swinging through town on a 1-3 night stand, playing, maybe offering up a Q and A forum, taking our money and leaving anymore than I do Ben 10 with a foam head and taped dialogue doing the same thing.

Each impacts on its desired audience in a certain way, but their is no engagement, no lasting legacy there is only the momentary impact of a nice night out and the McDonalds Touring Franchise that is the APACA touring route rolls on into the next town.

Venue hire and the snobbish belief that Season work is somehow more special, more impactful and more beneficial than other artforms have not just become the main game, for most venues across the country it has become the only game.

Instead of being genuine centres for the the betterment of the local population, each one unique with its own demographics and challenges, we all all just Subway outlets peddling the same menu - Happy Meals for the kids and 'posh' Angus burgers for the grown ups. And like a lot of fast food a short while later you are hungry again, for without genuine community involvement these meals lack nourishment.

You can't blame the Centre's of course they have budgets to meet, community programs generally come at a cost and the entire ecosystem is geared toward providing a nice little earner for the production companies. Without knowing it we have become subservient to the Opera Australia's and the The Bell Shakespeare's of our world, rolling into town in the belief that they will enlighten the unwashed masses and in 12 months time they will come back and do it all again.

There is also another reason why the model has failed and that is apart from a handful of indigenous touring production companies the works funded for touring almost universally exist within the European cannon of arts and culture. Think about this, how relevant is a Noel Coward play in the West of Sydney, where 55% of the population don't speak English at home? And most don't have butlers or apartments in Paris. And yet year after year the work is offered up and funded is WASP theatre. Again there are many many dedicated arts professionals working against the tide in the West of Sydney but when the ecosystem throws up works that are not relevant even in the slightest to the bulk of their population, those venues run the risk of being an anachronism. Forced to cater for an ever decreasing population of ageing white folk in a sea of people who never attend the venue except for school speech night, because there's nothing there for them.

So what to do? Overseas there are great companies such as Roadside Theater who only present work drawn directly from it's Appalachian community. Appalachia is an incredibly unique part of the US being dirt poor, rural and white, people in this part of the US really are different to the rest of the Country and culture runs deep in their veins, like the Welsh, music is a part of every home, the Carter Family came out of this region (Daughter June Carter married Johnny Cash) and practically invented country music as a genre. As a theatre they only produce work drawn from the community, the work is produced with the engagement of the community and one story about a court case had so much engagement that people stood up in the middle of the performance to argue about what took place. (Source: Counting New Beans)

This is an extreme example of course, 100% locally produced work and a clearly defined community and singular aim. However its lessons are there for us, unless our regional and suburban PAC's can invert the model and start making local engagement the main game rather than a sideline and unless they start to truly represent the diversity of their population and stop serving up theatre for WASPs. Our relevance will only continue to diminish.

A very good start would be to stop voting for franchise theatre at our annual show cases each year and say that unless your company is willing to invest something more that 3 nights on a 20 venue national tour we don't want you. We as venues need to demand more from our production companies, local acting workshops, school visits, the engagement of locals within certain parts of the performances (Another Counting New Beans example has a touring show that requires each venue to put to together a multi-racial local church choir together for the musical numbers otherwise it doesn't go there)

Anyhow, I'm sure I will offend some people with this post, but before you fire back with all the great programs you are running in your venue - tell this is it more than 15% of your total activity? Do you schedule any work in your season that isn't either European at heart or indigenous? Explain how your subscription season represents and impacts upon your local community. 

The challenge is there, either convince me the model isn't broken or tell me how your venue is working to change the model because I'd love to hear about it.

Take Part: Project update

Take Part is a brand that I invented to cover Canberra Theatre Centre's extended experience initiatives  Like most theatres we had been doing pre show forums, post show Q and A's and ad hoc dance workshops for years but it took the case studies described in the book Counting New Beans and and the experience of watching the work of Big hART to crystallise into something more.

The genesis was that, and I think I have covered this before, Canberra Theatre Centre doesn't really make or commission any new work. We are, in strict marketing terms, a re-seller or a retailer of pre-existing product.

So in terms of contributing culturally to the community our primary function is then in the art of curating. The trouble with that is that because the work is created elsewhere there is little additional impact for our local community other than the social inclusion and aesthetic appreciation and perhaps for particular work various intellectual or social/political messages that patrons are left with.

So how to take what is effectively re-sold product but more actively engage with our community?

The answer was Take Part. Where other theatres could trumpet certain works being "live and local" we now had a program that said "come and be part of what we are doing, actively take part in the stories we are telling". As we all know the impact of a two-way participative experience versus a one way passive experience is much greater.

A simple message that worked wonders. what was previously an amorphous concept, suddenly became a sea of opportunities waiting to happen. The question "could this be a Take Part opportunity" became common place within our office walls. The answer was usually 'yes, of course!'.

Now twelve months on how is it going?

The answer is great.

We started in March last year with 20 odd people watching a free movie screening of Summer of the 17th Doll after our season of the same play, and 30-40 attending a social history seminar. We progressed towards a sold out (30-40) language workshop with Big hART for Ngapartji Ngapartji and now three shows into 2013 our three major Take Part programs all sold out. 60 people for an intimate morning tea with John Bell, 100 tickets booked for the Secret River social history talk and 250 people to hear Gill Hicks ahead of the play Thursday.

The program now has the capacity to attract an audience ten times the size of what we started with in just one year.

Crucially all the programs aim to add value and insight into the work on stage and all aim to give the partons the chance to engage actively with the work, Gill Hicks was most generous with her question time.

Having seen audiences grow to the point where this is now a project that has serious sustainability, the next step is to hopefully measure the intrinsic impact of those who attended 
Take Part functions and saw the shows and those who did not. But as always these things take money so it's an ambition just now but we'll see,

I am very happy to discuss this initiative with those in the industry and nothing would pleas me more to see this model, shift us all out of post show Q&A land (but still keep doing these) and into wide new range of Take Part opportunities across the board.

It can work, we've seen it work, we now just need to show exactly what the impact is.

It's about people!

Do you know what the average stay is for a person after they have asked for and then received a raise?...

.

.

.

.

.

...Six weeks...

.

.

...I'll say that again

..

...

.... Six. Weeks!

I wish I could cite the source for this research but I can't, I stumbled across it half way through one of those ABC News 24 Big Ideas seminars and I found myself so completely lost in the content that in no time it was over and I had no idea who was speaking. Subsequent visits to the Big Ideas website were unhelpful in my quest.

The crux of that gem of information is of course NOT that there's no point offering people more money, which of course you should do, especially if those people are me. But at the point where somebody is finally saying "I need more money or I'm going" they have progressed so far beyond the point of money being the key driver for their level of satisfaction, they will also at that point have a gazillion job applications out in the market place as well so it's no surprise that they had an offer come in about the same time as their raise. 

No the point made by my anonymous teacher was that human beings are pretty universal in our drivers and money is not always the key motivator.

Another bit of research cited was that of workers in a developing community, some were offered BIG extra financial incentives to improve productivity and some were offered small ones. I think I am remembering correctly that the small incentive actually out performed the big one. Now that is not to say you should never give people big pay rises, especially if those people are me... but that again to further illustrate that money is not the key driver.

So what is.

The Clever Dude that was talking said it was two things:

1. Self determination and
2. Mastery of skills

These are the golden tickets to to employee satisfaction and greater overall gains for your business.

When people feel they have a level of autonomy, of control over their own destiny, they will take that on. They'll care more, they will feel more satisfied, they will OWN their successes and failures. Within my own team I am constantly doing this, my gang basically know the boundaries of the playground they work within and how much self-determination they have within it. It means that sometimes, many times, their execution of marketing campaigns differs slightly to how I would do it. I do not stop this. I encourage it. For example I have one staff members who has a long history in press, her campaigns usually have a greater press spend than my campaigns would, BUT precisely because of her knowledge they are usually more informed press spends. The net gain or loss to the campaign is practically impossible to measure, I just smile when I see her campaigns and think "Oh of course the press spend is higher". (Although she will now twig when she reads this blog!)

More tellingly however is what happens when people are denied self determination, care and attention to detail goes out the window, satisfaction levels sink and efficiency goes into the toilet as everybody queues up outside the manager's door to have even the smallest of details ticked off. 

Then there's mastery of skills, people spends hours and hours of their spare time learning to play the guitar, many badly, and never is there any sense of future financial gain in this. The satisfaction gained form mastering a skill is innate. You can see it in chimps, the hours they spend learning a new dig the termite out with a simple stick tool trick, the pay off is not just in the food (termites - yum!) but you can see the pleasure on their faces in the "YES I've got it" moment.

So WHY OH WHY does every organisation automatically cut spending in hard times? Mine did. And I bet yours did too.

Giving people scope within their role to master their skills, time to play with new tools, time to hone their writing, design skills, or play with Instagram whilst assessing its use for your business is immensely satisfying to them and comes back to your business in spades. 

When I'm asked by my team if they can purchase certain tools (software, camera equipment etc) if the cost is in the hundreds, I'm a walking yes factory. Seriously if they are keen enough to achieve whatever it is that thing will achieve why on Earth would I say no? it can only be to mine and the company's benefit in the end. (OH yeah Managers - empowering your staff to do good work makes you look better - remember this!! YOU get kudos for doing not much, it's a win-win!!)

Clever Dude had countless examples, you know places like Google that give staff X% of free time at work to work on random fun projects of their own determination. Those policies are the ultimate expression of both major points he was making. Sometimes these play moments end up making for the company major new product innovations that never would have happened under a more task-oriented work environment.

But we as managers can start more simply, with our attitudes, policies and procedures, by fighting for our training budgets and although I haven't covered it here, of course positive feedback when staff have done well, and constructive feedback when things need to be worked on (There's NEVER any need at that point to say 'BAD staff member BAD', people are bright, if they have ownership, which they will have because you will now give it to them - right? right?, they'll own that error and guaranteed it won't happen again because they care)

Well that's it for today and if you saw the speech I'm remembering or reckon you know the dude I'm talking about PLEASE shoot me Clever Dude's real name I'd love to read ALL of his stuff!

Brands with an limited shelf life

Unless it is a major musical or a touring concert act most of the products we engage with in the performing arts have a limited shelf life, in some cases maybe only a matter of weeks for the idea to be taken to market, people to become aware of it and then hopefully buy tickets.

And that's got me thinking, what other types of products do this, exist in a bespoke manner for a very limited period and then disappear.

Outside of the performing arts I can only really think of fast food special menu items and fashion as two similar examples.

McDonalds always have a new item on their menu for just a limited time, lamburgers, Angus beef, McRib (or as Homer would say "Hmmmm McRiiiib"), special slushies and the list goes on. So why do they do this? It's pretty simple really McDonalds is omnipresent, it's just always there, if they don't give you different reasons to visit there's every chance that you could fall out of the habit of going.

And how do they do it? Again really simply, they bombard you with marketing, mainly TV but from time to time social media too. With a big spend and frequency, frequency, frequency. The lamburger practically appears in your hands via some form of "message-to-matter" process that scientist themselves don't even understand. Quantum physics I think.

It is also interesting to note that McDonalds uses different media for different messages. TV sells the specials, outdoor is directional "Next Macca's 500m on the right" and radio is informational "in your market there is a 24 hr McDonalds operating", "McDonalds now has better coffee" and the like.

Trouble is all of these special short term products are the teeny-tiniest sub-brands serving the needs of a dominant overall major brand. Performing arts in most cases the show is at least the equal of the organisation on brand terms if not more important. But the lesson we can learn from Macca's is to choose frequency with your media buy when creating recognition for a product with a short term life span.

Fashion too is a bit different as the product with a short life span is not a single product but a set of products that are marketed as "this season's look". As there is usually some commonality across stores with 'looks', its a weird situation where you and your competitors are cross-selling for each other, generating a demand for a 'look' and then people select which store to go to partly out of brand loyalty and partly just as a result of browsing the shopping centres.

So the fashion analogy leads one towards brand loyalty, performing arts companies with a strong brand such as Bell Shakespeare, Sydney Theatre Company and Bangarra Dance Theatre bring with them pre-existing brand equity which means there's already a readiness to accept the 'new' offering and creates a sense of standing apart when one is surfing the net or flicking through the weekend newspaper magazines thinking about things to do in the coming weeks.

So frequency and working on a strong primary brand as two keys to launching a product/show into the market place for a short period of time. 

To this list, I would add a third, care, take the time to really nail the design and word execution around the show. If you only have a short period of time to build up a show's brand you really have to nail it, make every component work as best it can, focus on how will the show impact on the patron and do everything you can to represent that feeling or response in your marketing, if you are selling an unrequited love story then your marketing should drip with pathos. "Have you ever being in love", "For anybody who has loved and lost before" OK these are clichés but you get the drift. Put the audience into the picture, give them a taste of the feeling. 

By-the-by MacDonalds now often launch new product with cheap $3 dollar taste wraps, they give you a teaser of the full thing. It shard for us to do this in the arts but we work towards giving people as much of a taste as we can.

Anyway that's enough for now. I'll leave you and your budgets to figure out how you achieve frequency!

Do physical theatres constrain community connection?

Its more of a thought bubble this week...

Does the presence of a physical theatre and the need to manage such a resource prevent city, county/state or territory funded Performing Arts Centres from achieving everything they could achieve?

How would say the “BIG NEW SUBURB PERFORMING ARTS CENTRE” be different if it didn't actually have a BIG NEW PERFORMING ARTS CENTRE to manage and populate with shows?

Are we tying up valuable arts funding in capital expenditure when we could be using it in other ways?

What if the programming/marketing/backstage/ticketing/FOH activities that performing arts centres generally deliver to communities happened but without the constraints of having to happen within a set of fixed four walls?

Programming would be entirely site specific, education programs would happen almost universally in schools, communities would naturally be more engaged in the creation of work as it would be happening all around them and work would HAVE to be created to spec. Maybe the conversation would be less around the programming off-the-shelf Williamson touring productions and more focused on the needs, issues and interests of the community being served.

I dunno, I just find the focus on large monuments is sometimes a distraction from the real purpose of workplaces like ours…

Its certainly a distraction for politicians and bureaucrats when it comes to big picture vision thinking. It's all about getting their name on a plaque and not about achieving real results for communities.

What EA Sports can teach Arts Marketers

Chris Erb from EA SPORTS was a key note speaker at Ad:tech Sydney. For those who don't know EA sports is not just a giant in the gaming sector but also the global sports sector, and as a purveyor of discretionary entertainment spend there's a lot the arts can learn from them.

According to Erb, the main reason EA has become such a powerful sports brand is because it gives fans of sport serious and powerful engagement over an above the more passive consumption of a rival like ESPN. (Yes, they see ESPN as their main rival not other game developers.)

The success of EA is built on attracting known brands (NFL, FIFA) to licence them to develop games then delivering extremely well on the promise of those brands.

Some stats: EA Sports has 19 million facebook fans and 80% of users play 20 hrs per week or more - that's huge engagement.

The EA Sports mission is to build and drive connected experiences. Although the arts don't have games - what ways can we make our product more active, less passive and how can we drive engagement be it physical world or virtual?

EA does a lot work on "surprise and delight" features for instance, you can unlock a hidden passage of 3D gaming within Madden Football. But to do this you had to buy a special brand of Doritos chips to get the code and free glasses.

With regards to pricing EA stands for good value, doesn't gouge and only works with authentic collaborators (i.e. Football fans eat chips!).

They always keep the consumers at the heart of how they market their product - asking how would our gamers react if we did this?

Their BIG NEW THING currently is building offline experiences to strengthen connection with their predominately online brand. This is done by the development of themed EA Sports Bars, including ones on cruise ships and EA Sports shops in airports. The arts already is strong in the physical world, if EA is clamouring to offer physical experiences we need to realise what a strength that is for us .

EA's customer knowledge is HUGE for instance they can find out, of all of the people playing NFL Madden online last Thursday, the percentage of people who always pass to the right on the third down. The arts also has access to comparatively much more data than the usual retailer and needs to look at it with fresh eyes.

Erb also says that gamification isn't just the domain of video game makers, anything can be made into a game and many corporates are using game-type play to strengthen positive buyer behaviour - I have further notes on gamification and will expand on this in a future post.

The key take homes for me from Erb and EA were:

• Look for ways to make the arts experience more active, more two-way and less passive one-way. 
• Look beyond your niche to know your true competitors. 
• Think about surprise and delight features. (a live band in the foyer, free wine tastings, unscheduled announcement to join the cast after the show) 
• Think about real, authentic corporate relationships that make sense to your consumer. 
• Leverage our real-world strength - that people come and interact with the arts in a physical sense. 
• If you have access to rich data - even if not quite as rich as theirs - use it. 
• Make a game of it! People will do things they might not otherwise if you make a game of it.