When Members See Themselves As Donors

by:

Joe Patti

Earlier this month, Colleen Dilenschneider and IMPACTS Experience released data on exclusive access being a membership benefit that was important to high value museum members.

I wasn’t really sure that I would find anything in the article that piqued my interest so I didn’t prioritize reading the research. But it turns out there was one thing that caught my attention and made me wonder if it held true among performing arts audiences.

Apparently people who join at membership levels of $250 or more view themselves as donors rather than members and have similar expectations donors have. (Dilenschneider’s bold, my italics)

We tend to see in the data that individuals purchasing memberships at the $250 price point or above consider themselves to be donors more than members. Yes, they know that they are technically members, but their expectations align more closely with those of a donor than a member at a lower price point.

If people see themselves as donors to our organizations, then it’s often beneficial to treat them this way to not only meet expectations but to cultivate further support. Your museum might consider members and donors to be different people, but research indicates that this may be a false categorization on the part of museums. Higher level members tend to view themselves as donors.

It bears paying attention to this because another thing IMPACTS found was that member households with an income of $200,000 or more value priority/exclusive access and members-only events over free admission. This is not to say they aren’t happy to have free admission, this group tends to want deeper access than households with incomes less than $200,000.

Something I was curious to know was whether this tendency was associated with income or was in tandem with the amount they gave. As mentioned earlier people with memberships of $250+ view themselves as donors deserving of donor type treatment. However, if a household making $200,000 has a $150 membership, do they have an expectation of access to exclusive experiences. I imagine people who spend more would expect more, but I was interested to know if the expectation was more closely associated with household income level regardless of membership level.

Dilenschneider acknowledges some organizations may feel they don’t have the time and resources to meet these higher expectations on a daily basis. She points out that these members and donors are what keep the lights on and the doors open. She notes their research shows that the top three increases in museum membership complaints since 2019 have been lack of special access (member hours, member entrance, member events), not being able to skip the lines, and solicitation phone calls. (the phone calls are #2 between special access and skipping lines).

This represents an aspect of the growing tension between funder expectations and organization desire to focus on the core mission activities. This manifests not only in terms of organizations preference that they not have to provide so much special treatment to donors, but also from a desire to provide consolidated, streamlined grant applications and final reports rather complete the multiple forms and formats of each funder.

Dilenschneider’s own research has shown visitors, especially among younger age cohorts, value organizations that are mission focused in their activities and communications. So museums may find themselves caught trying to devote resources to both mission focused experiences and special membership access experiences.

Talk About How Your Cancelled NEA Grant Impacts Your Community

by:

Joe Patti

This weekend Margy Waller posted a guide for arts and cultural organizations to use to talk about the termination of your National Endowment for the Arts grant.

The guide is based on research the Topos Partnership did about how to talk about arts with your community. Waller says not to just focus on the dollar amount, but the impact it will have on the community.

What was the goal? What impact would it have had on the community? How is it specifically relevant?

Waller goes into detail on each point, but the common through-line was communicating the relevance and impact to the community rather than the arts organization. This is very much in line with how folks like Ruth Hartt advocate for marketing arts experiences in terms of the benefits and outcomes for the audience rather than using artist or organization focused language.

For example, when discussing the community impact, she advises:

Second: What did you expect the grant to do? How can you describe it in a common-sense way, in one sentence? Try leaving out the jargon and insider language that requires explanation to people outside the ‘family.’ What is it? Explain HOW you will accomplish the goal you established, for example: Paying artists to…

-Put on a show that will bring people into the neighborhood where they will connect with others and enjoy drinks or dinner too

-Make art that tells stories of your place

-Develop events that build neighborhood connections and engagement

-Create campaigns about health services

Related to this, artist and director Annie Dorsen created a Google doc which crowdsources all the entities that had their NEA grants rescinded. Its apparently gotten such heavy use they are now requiring people to fill out a form with their responses. Arts Analytics has been crunching the numbers from the Google doc and provided an analysis as of May 20.

There were a lot of familiar names on the crowd sourced list. One of the ones that made me cringe the most was Springboard for the Arts’ losing $150,000 for a project meant to combat the mental health crisis in rural and urban Minnesota. I have been a fan of the work they do for decades. Springboard Executive Director Laura Zabel was among the arts leaders interviewed by PBS Newshour a week ago.

Test Driving Seats Without The Pressure Of Performance

by:

Joe Patti

I had purchased tickets from the Straz Center in Tampa, FL as a gift for family members earlier this year so I ended up on their mailing list.

This week I received an email inviting me to a sort of open house they are hosting (below) in a couple weeks where people can “test drive” seats they want to sit in at Broadway shows.

I would be interested to see how many people attend the event. I am sure there are quite a few people who are seriously invested in where they sit, but there are also likely to be quite a few people who will take advantage of the opportunity to wander through the hall without the pressure of needing to push through a crowd to find their seats before a show.

I offer this as an interesting marketing tactic others may want to emulate in some degree.

However, on a personal level I will say that I had a difficult time and faced so many barriers in purchasing tickets, including having the staff offer solutions and then contact me the next day to rescind that solution, offer an alternative and subsequently rescind that offer the following day. The recipient of the tickets also needed to navigate some hurdles.

I rarely complain aloud about an experience I had on my blog but the issues I faced were so bad that I am doing so. If other customers faced problems similar to those I did, I feel like this test drive offer isn’t going to create better relationships with the audience. Their time would be better spent on fundamentals like tightening up policies and procedures before employing an approach like this.

Will Cultural Prescriptions Come To NYC?

by:

Joe Patti

Earlier this week Hyperallergic had an article about the cultural plans of two candidates for NYC mayor, Brad Lander and Zohran Mamdani. From the article, it appears Lander has a more detailed plan, though polls of Democratic primary voters are more favorable to Mamdani and former NY Governor Andrew Cuomo.

Part of Lander’s plan includes ““…cultural prescription program” that would allow doctors to “prescribe” art to promote holistic health. I have written about similar programs in Canada and Europe before. These programs generally take the form of passes to organizations and places.

Lander also wants to create more funding for smaller organizations and marginalized communities and create a deputy mayor for the arts and culture

He also wants to improve lease terms for creative spaces to address displacement; increase the membership of the Cultural Institutional Group (CIG) receiving funding from the city, which currently includes primarily major museums and organizations; and boost public school art programs.

Mamdani is similarly focused on providing better accessibility to spaces for artists and organizations:

Mamdani emphasized the importance of affordability for artists in the city and reiterated his plans to build more affordable housing. Mamdani also said he would prioritize preventing New Yorkers from being “priced out” of the arts and securing more funding for arts education in public schools. 

I will confess that my initial inclination was to wonder if these were just idealized plans and if the candidates had any concept of how they would be paid for. But then I was reminded that Lander is the NYC Comptroller so he is actually intimately familiar with the city’s budget and how it is spent.

123773 Next