Joe Patti

Access to experts and leadership is an important membership benefit according to data collected by Colleen Dilenschneider and the folks at IMPACTS Experience. (sub required)

The top ranked benefit is some form of free admission followed by benefits related to priority access/seating, exclusive membership events, etc. However, access to experts and leadership have been increasing in value for both exhibit and performing arts organizations.

The increase has been greater for exhibit based entities than performing arts entities largely in part because performing arts have a longstanding practice of talks, program notes, and interactions with creative staff.

IMPACTS says that it is a mistake to underestimate the value of these interactions.

Even though performing arts have had this longstanding practice, it is important to make sure these offerings are providing experiences that the members value rather than what staff and experienced insiders values.

In fact IMPACTS encourages membership levels based on the outcomes people desire.

They also suggest that access to leadership and access to experts be two separate benefits. In part, this is to keep access limited and valued in addition to allowing leaders and experts to perform their core duties. But what a curator, choreographer, researcher, stage director has to offer is a different product from that of an executive director, V.P. of Marketing, etc.

The one insight from the article that really caught my attention and made lightbulbs come on is that while free admission may be the most valued benefit by far, it is not the benefit that will keep people engaged.

I hadn’t really thought about what sort of behaviors membership benefits were encouraging in visitors. A discount on the next time someone visits leaves their next visit up in the air. Providing reasons to return throughout the next year helps to solidify when that next visit might happen.

Members may not be able to take advantage of every interaction with an expert due to competing priorities but providing those opportunities keeps members paying attention to the schedule. That results in a higher degree of engagement than knowing you can get a 15% discount at the bar on your next visit.

A post Seth Godin made has been percolating around in my brain for the last three months.

This dovetails closely with what Ruth Hartt has been saying about asking customers what they value or seek most from their interactions with your organization and then creating marketing messaging that aligns with their goals and interest.

Obviously Hartt’s approach requires less empathy than Godin’s. You don’t need to employ much empathy if you are asking people what they value. Though you do need to understand what sort of language and framing will resonate best with people who have certain goals for their experience.

What both don’t directly mention is that the product or experience you are working to provide needs to be informed by an understanding or empathy about what sort of programming will help people achieve their goals. Programming decisions are an exercise in marketing.

Just as being repulsed by the idea of eating durian ice cream doesn’t preclude others from enjoying the food, programming decisions can’t be made based on personal preference. I have had plenty of financial and participatory success programming events whose appeal I just don’t understand.

But it is enough for me to know that there are people with a serious interest in that experience to make a decision to offer it.

Last week a colleague had posted on LinkedIn about a secret pop-up concert Phoebe Bridgers had conducted in one of her venues. She had mentioned that people’s phones were stored away in magnetic Yondr pouches. At the time I assumed that this was because it was a secret concert.

But later that day or the next, Artsjournal.com had a WBEZ story about Chicago venues that were requiring people to stow their phones in pouches and specifically mentioned that musicians Phoebe Bridgers and David Byrne were requiring concert attendees to check their phones at the door.

The WBEZ story was reporting on a broader attempt to create an environment where people interacted and socialized to a greater degree than they are.

Because the story shifts quickly between discussing the environment in which this efforts are occurring, I made the mistake of thinking theaters were providing games and activities for audiences. That was actually a program by a marketing group called Little Council in response to clients seeking unplugged spaces where people could engage with each other.

They have an area in a co-working space labeled “Fulfillment Center” whose goal is to assist the achievement of personal fulfillment.

Even though I was mistaken about where the Fulfillment Center materials were being used, something along these lines might be something a performance space/group with the right vibe might employ. (Probably won’t be found in Lincoln Center in NYC, but maybe the Lincoln Center in Fort Collins, CO)

Ideally, you wouldn’t use this in conjunction with confiscating phones but rather as a social lubricant to get people in a communal space chatting with each other and asking to borrow the purple markers. Though in some places people may be so entrenched with their phones there may be little to no movement away from them after offering alternatives for a year.

Activities like these can make experiences feel more welcoming. One venue I ran, I created a visual arts fair that occurred twice a year. I partnered with a local creative group who helped arrange for music and different themed activities. I was a little concerned that people might not think a visual arts fair was for someone like themselves so having music and activities was one way to make the experience more welcoming.

The turn out and participation wasn’t too bad. I haven’t really tried something like that in connection with a performance but it could definitely work after some trial and error in design and execution.

There was an article on the FastCompany website talking about how companies can’t expect to scale customer connection. It needs to happen on a individualize basis through a relatively painstaken process rather than via high volume communication channels.

This made me think of a mini case study regarding the efforts of the New Bedford Symphony (NBS) Ruth Hartt has been sharing via her newsletter and LinkedIn posts. Hartt relates how NBS learned about what motivated their patrons by speaking and surveying them directly rather than making assumptions about them based on demographic data.

She says that people can feel uncomfortable collecting data in this manner because you end up having some very personal conversations with audience members.

What NBS has done is create a handful of personalized landing pages that align with audience motivations (i.e. seeking to relax/recharge, learn something new/expand horizons, spend time with family and friends). They sent emails that connected people to personalized landing pages that best aligned with their desired outcomes.

For the last 14 weeks NBS has been doing a little experiment sending personalized emails to those they surveyed and general non-personalized emails about concerts to the rest of their mailing list. The personalized emails have been out performing the non-personalized ones handily.

Hartt says it is the fact the marketing messaging is focused on the customer needs and interests rather than on the organization or the work being performed that makes the difference.