Home Page

Can It Happen Everywhere?

November 8, 2006

by:

Joe Patti

As I was perusing Artsjournal.com on Tuesday, I came across a link to an OpinionJournal.com article covering the Knight Foundation’s final report on their Magic of Music Initiative.

I have read earlier installations of this initiative and did an entry on Penelope McPhee’s remarks at an initiative retreat in 2002. What got me to read the final report sooner than later was a section of the news article that said that the final report concluded:

Free events drew crowds, but attendees did not later shell out money for tickets. Nor did the bountiful numbers who attended off-site concerts later patronize the box office. Outreach programs to new audiences also failed to get people to buy tickets.

What I wanted to know was is it the free events, off-site programs and outreach programs that don’t work or is it that people weren’t interested in buying tickets to the symphony but might do so for theatre or dance.

Long story short, the report doesn’t really say because none of those surveyed were asked questions which might reveal if different attitudes toward dance and theatre might exist. I suspect, however, that it might be that people don’t like the symphony. The study reports that large numbers of people regularly listened to classical music, but “did not consider the concert hall the preferred place to listen to it. The automobile was the single most frequently used venue for classical music, followed by the home.”

Absent a similar study for theatre and dance, it is difficult to say that it is the concert hall environment and not the prospect of having to pay that is the barrier to attendance.

One thing I did see as encouraging was the finding that “…only 6 percent of those interested in classical music considered themselves very knowledgeable about it, while more than half described themselves as “not very knowledgeable.” Still, it gave them enjoyment.”

I don’t quite know how to constructively exploit this attitude yet, but I find it heartening that people aren’t reluctant to experience something they don’t completely understand. They may not feel confident or even interested in going to see a performance at a concert hall, but people are actively choosing to listen in their cars and homes despite a perceived unknowable quality.

The road to converting people to paying attendees might run through paid performances in a different setting or context preceded by marketing with a message to visit our website or come talk to our trained volunteer staff who will help make you feel competent in a low intimidation environment. And I say this in connection with all arts disciplines, not just classical music.

There is huge amount of interesting stuff in this report. I am not going to go in depth with a discussion because Drew McManus has mentioned he was going to talk about it and I daresay he will do a better job of it than I would. I am sure he will touch upon how the near impossibility of getting the musical directors involved essentially hobbled the initiative right from the start. (But if he doesn’t, now you know a little about it and should read the final report.)

In the interests of getting people to take a look at the final report, I will say that the process the Knight Foundation went through to initially solicit proposals and the mistakes they realized they made in the timing and format of their RFP is fascinating. I also have only touched upon about 1/10th of their findings and mentioned nearly nothing about the successful and interesting things some orchestras did.

Yeah, the report is about 50 pages long (with lots of large pictures) but there is much to ponder. You may not feel you have time, but commit to reading 5 pages of text a day and you will be done in a week or so.

Audience Relations

No Comments

He Who Sells My Good Name

November 6, 2006

by:

Joe Patti

About a month ago I was at a meeting of arts people hovering on the edge of a conversation discussing the creation of a consolidated database of arts attendees or some sort of limited sharing of lists.

My first thought wasn’t about jealously guarding my list from their greedy grasping hands. There are quite a few people with whom I wouldn’t feel threatened sharing my list.

My initial concern was that have I gone to great pains to assure my ticket buyers that we will not sell, trade, etc., their information. There is such a concern about spam, phone calls and identity theft, that audiences need a high degree of assurances about the use of their information before they provide it to you.

In fact, we often have people who have signed up on our mailing list sheet in the lobby at intermission upset that it is still out at the end of the performance. Considering there is no information that can’t be acquired from the phonebook, their fear is a little irrational. It is difficult to steal someone’s identity with their address and the added information that they attended a show at the theatre. People usually feel a little silly when I point out the reality of this.

Which is not to say that we don’t handle information with which a person could steal someone’s identity. We are very careful about getting proof of ID before handing out credit card receipts at will call. Even if people act a little irrationally about their personal information, it only goes to show how important protecting it is to your relationship with them.

But back to the mailing list issue.

When I am signing up on a website that collects information, there is often a opt in/out box where the company asks permission to share information with their partners in order to offer the widest range of options and the best customer service.

Now I don’t buy for a moment that I will benefit from whatever their partners have to offer. I wonder if a similar approach could be applied to ones patrons though– “As an arts lover we would like to offer you information on the widest range of activities in town. May we share your information with other arts organizations?” I guess as an arts person, I would have a less cynical view of that approach coming from a theatre than I do when my credit card company uses it. I don’t know how the average patron who already gets appeals from a theatre, the United Way and college alumni association around year end might see it.

I was wondering if anyone had dealt with the issue of sharing names in the last year or two. Did you ask your patrons if you could share the info or did you just do it? If you did ask, how did you go about doing it? Did people know in advance that you might share their information?

When you did share your list, did you place stipulations on its use? For example, one brochure mailing and then the list is destroyed so that the only way to capture the information is if the person buys a ticket. I once had a condo association give me a list with the provision that they send it directly to my mail house who had signed a promise to immediately destroy the disk.

If you did share the list with such restrictions, did your partner abide by the rules or did your planted address get appeals and mailing beyond what you had agreed to? (Common trick when sharing lists is to add the names and addresses of employees with a low public profile or friends/family members who have agreed to help you keep an eye on how the list is used.)

General Musings

1 Comment

Blogging Caveats

November 1, 2006

by:

Joe Patti

I was attending a seminar on public relations today and the speaker addressed some issues about blogs which I realized are self-evident to me as a blogger, but might not be so clear to anyone pondering starting one.

As much as I like to talk about how useful blogs can be to arts organizations, they aren’t for everyone. As with any application of technology, you shouldn’t be trying to use blogs or podcasts or whatever because they are the hot new thing everybody is using. Employing a technology poorly with no sense of purpose is worse than employing it poorly with an objective. If you have a purpose, then you know what direction to pursue to make the technology work for you. Without a purpose, you are forever flailing.

In relation to blogs in particular-

Don’t start one if you don’t have time to regularly devote to it. The online community is voracious. If you commit to writing every day, write that often. If it is weekly, then stick to that general schedule. If you aren’t producing as promised, people will stop visiting. Since you are probably blogging for the exposure and public relations benefit a lack of regular visitors has little value. Worse, people may start filling your comments section with insults and harsh criticism if they think no one is minding the store.

Blogging is definitely time consuming unless you are the type that can produce prolifically with little effort so you definitely want to make sure you have the time. One of the important operative words there is YOU. One of the mistakes the public relations people cited is having subordinates ghost writing for the head of an organization since the boss rarely has the time. The damage that is done and the loss of faith that occurs when it is revealed that the boss isn’t the one writing is often quite great.

At the very least, the person under whose name the entries are being written should be reviewing the material before it is posted. Ideally, they should be the one hitting the post button.

My last pointer is the most difficult to advise people about due to a lack of hard and fast rules. Be careful when and how you respond to criticism. Some times you have to respond quickly to avert a real crisis in progress. Often you should only do so after some consideration and letting your temper cool or not at all. Unfortunately, fiery invective and wild accusations often appear to require addressing immediately lest the blogosphere think ill of you.

It is only later that you realize you proved the old maxim–It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. Thanks to search engine caches, it can be rather difficult to expunge the record of what you said from the internet by simply editing your entries. Blogging and emailing have joined driving as activities you shouldn’t engage in while agitated.

Featured

No Comments

Alas, All Too Real

October 31, 2006

by:

Joe Patti

I spent most of today as a caveman, thinking primarily about food and shelter to stay in character (and suffering the comments from co-workers saying it was no great strain upon me to act the part of a caveman). As a result I pondered little of great import today.

However, had I not been pursuing some Halloween fun, I doubt I could have posted anything half as insightful (and from some of the commentary, inciteful) as Drew McManus’ second installment recounting his experience working with arts management grad students at University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Both installments are a good read, but the second one packs a punch with its discussion of results and conclusions from his exercise. Read both for the full context, but if you only have time for one, make it the second.

Drew has lead this activity before where he has graduate students roleplay a musician bargaining committee for an orchestra. I don’t know if Drew had a different scenario than when he was at the Eastman School of Music or if, as people familiar with the orchestra world, the Eastman students recognized the scenario as being within the realm of possibility. What brought the whole exercise the UW to a halt was the students’ disbelief that the financial statements they were looking at had any basis in reality.

In Drew’s first installation, the mock negotiation team essentially walks away from the table in disgust at the financial mismanagement and decide they are going to form their own orchestra.

In the second installation, Drew recounts his discussions with the students about how the apparently hopeless situation the students found themselves in was all too similar to ones with which orchestra musicians are confronted. Reading the entries brought back a flood of memories and emotions about a dismal experience I had working at a mismanaged theatre. Symphonies haven’t cornered the market on awful decision making.

For all the disillusionment and frustration it brought the UW students, I wish my graduate training program had offered a similar class to us. As Drew says, it helps dispel preconcieved notions and allows future managers to enter the profession with their eyes open. Although, when I ended up having that exact experience, I might have seen it as indicative of how it was everywhere and quit the arts immediately.

Management Philosophy

No Comments