Home Page

How Will Your Organization Live On?

September 16, 2008

by:

Joe Patti

In the past, whenever I would get anxious about whether a marketing plan would work, I would always think about New Coke. If ever you think that someone who is smarter, has a bigger research and marketing budget, more personnel and resources could do a better job, all you have to do is look at new Coke to realize having these benefits at your disposal are no guarantee of success.

Now as we watch Bears Stearns, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, AIG Insurance, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Washington Mutual encounter troubles we are basically provided with more contemporary examples of how this is true.

Of course, even if your marketing budget is 1/100,000,000,000th of Coke’s, the stakes and disappointment if your plan fails are not equally exponentially less than they experienced. In fact, since there are fewer people to distribute blame around to, your experience may be greater.

It can also take far fewer and far less severe mistakes and mismanagement to lay your organization low. The events of the last few months have brought an all to familiar reminder of organizational mortality. If there is one realization most non-profit arts organizations embraced long before the for-profit world, it is that there is no such thing as “too big to fail.” A great many arts organizations have experienced “donor bailouts” and come back strong while the cash infusion allowed others to linger awhile longer before finally closing.

The reminder for many arts organizations is that they don’t have any intrinsic right to exist. There were far more people invested in the continuation of the aforementioned corporations than have ever willed the continuation of an arts organization. As a result some of these companies have been bought out or merged. But as of the time of this entry, it doesn’t look as if anyone is going to step forward to save Lehman Brothers. There have been some merger partnerships between arts organizations in the past to save one or the other of them (first that comes to mind is Asolo Repertory Theatre and Sarasota Ballet circa 1997). But for many arts organizations, that option doesn’t present itself.

As many organizations of every type are wont to say, a organization is not the physical presence as it is the people and ideal that it represents. If anything is going to remain of an arts organization after its demise, it is that. If an arts organization is smart, they will devote a lot of energy to cultivating and sustaining their image and ideal throughout their existence.

Pam Am Airlines once spanned the world regularly serving every continent except Antarctica. The airline failed in 1991 and subsequent attempts to resurrect air service under that name likewise failed. However, the cachet of the name is still powerful and currently appears with the familiar logo on the side of railroad freight cars. The company even named their quarterly reports (of hopefully their success) Pan Am Clipper, the terminology the airline used for their planes. And people still hold hope that the airline will fly again. In a Forbes article last year, a Miami attorney was looking to license the name for an airline flying internationally.

Few arts organizations have that sort of name recognition on a national level. But it is possible to generate value for an arts organization on a local or regional level. Given that it is quite possible we are in a transitional stage for the way the arts are presented and experienced, many arts entities may go out of business over the course of a few years. The name may re-emerge as with Pan Am, with a different physical manifestation altogether but with intangibles like the core identity, quality and values transferring intact.

The Asolo Theatre moved operations from a theatre that originated in Asolo, Italy into a theatre that originated in Dunfermline, Scotland. Arena Stage moved across the Potomac River into Virginia and no one doubted they were the same organization. Identity is not tied to physical places. Now if either went out of business and reemerged as a video game developer or communications company, their new customer base would probably have few overlaps with their old one. But there would still be a association with quality entertainment experiences lingering in people’s minds which can have positive results for the new companies.

Arts in an Age of Technology, State of the Arts

No Comments

Fuzzy Definitions

September 10, 2008

by:

Joe Patti

During his talk prior to the design charette for Performing Arts Center Eastside, Alan Brown cited the 1997 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts commissioned by the National Endowment for the Arts. Brown apparently has access to the raw data which is not listed in the NEA report. The answers Brown lists from the survey may cause you to question the results of the surveys you conduct.

Brown lists an admittedly small excerpt of the verbatim responses to the question: “What was the last “classical music” concert that you attended?” Among the answers listed are Tito Puentes, The Stompers, Showboat with Tom Bosley, Music Man, King and I and Oliver.

For the question, “What was the last “opera” that you attended,” Phantom of the Opera appears five times along with Les Miz, Brigadoon and “It was on Broadway” (remember, these are recorded verbatim).

Not having access to all the raw data, I have no idea what percentage of the answers these represent. As I suggested, it does make you wonder when people answer surveys that they enjoy and want to see more classical music or opera, if your concept of classical music/opera is the same as theirs. These results are from 10 years ago so I wonder how much less significant these categories are to people these days.

I also wonder if there isn’t a constructive way to make use of this situation. By and large people attending a performance have absolutely no idea if the hosting organization is for profit or non-profit (and a foggier notion of what that may mean). They aren’t there to support their favorite non-profit, they are there because they enjoy the product. They may feel a loyalty and trust in the organization but it might not have any relation to the tax status.

With this in mind, would it be a benefit to arts organizations to de-emphasize classical and opera and focus on the idea that they produce great performances? You wouldn’t want to abandon the label altogether or misrepresent what you were offering because you would alienate people who did know the difference between opera, classical music and musical theatre (or ballet, modern, jazz; Shakespeare, Miller, Godot, etc) The Philadelphia Orchestra isn’t going to get away with advertising a concert as their latest remix of that rockin’ composer of the 20th century, Rachmaninoff. Unless, of course, they do treat his music to a remixing, the nuances of their interpretation vs. another orchestra’s will hardly constitute a remix.

Acknowledging that people don’t care how performances are categorized as long as they have an enjoyable experience changes the way you market performances. If the definition of classical music is rather nebulous, the fact that the violinist received a Pomme Rouge when they were 17 is nearly bereft of meaning. (As it should be, my mother was giving me pommes rouge before I was 5 years old.) Marketing has to focus on why someone will enjoy the performance and not overly concern itself with convincing someone they like the organization’s definition of classical music or whether the recipient likes classical music at all.

This probably sounds strange because the performance is of the organization’s definition of classical music. But what I am getting at is that the focus shouldn’t be on telling everyone what a great and important guy Beethoven was. Certainly, mentioning Symphony No. 5 in C minor, Op. 67 is a waste of column inches in a newspaper for all the influence it is likely to have. Telling people they will enjoy it because the opening motif is one of the most recognizable phrases in the world and has been appropriated and integrated in numerous compositions since can be convincing. The idea that it is Death knocking at Beethoven’s door is certainly compelling.

I know that this is pretty much discredited but that is the story Pat Conroy tells students in The Water Is Wide. I first read the book 20 years ago and that fact has stuck in my mind since. If the piece can inspire excitement in poorly educated students who were entirely unaware of classical music, what impact will it have on people who are marginally or generally aware of it? Even more importantly, the kids didn’t know classical music to know if they liked it or not. I’d bet they would have categorized Beethoven alongside any other piece of well played music they came across.

Of course, the water flows both ways in regard to this sentiment. When asked if they liked opera, someone might say they liked Phantom but didn’t really care for The Magic Flute. A good experience with what they think is opera, classical music, Shakespeare (but really Oscar Wilde), won’t guarantee liking the “real” thing. Nor may it inspire experimentation even if they equate Phantom with opera due to simple lack of name recognition.

So what I am saying is, just put the information out there telling people why they will enjoy a performance and let them decide if they will or not. In some respects, if people are defining what might traditionally fall in a Pops concert (Marvin Hamlisch, Burt Bacharach) as classical music, it could help, however marginally, to gently dissolve the barriers of definition and include familiar pieces like Beethoven’s 5th. The 1812 Overture certainly hops back and forth across this fence. Bugs Bunny helped turn classical music into pop music. Perhaps there is something to be gained by tossing the Blue Danube Waltz into the pops. I still associate that piece with the cartoon of swans swimming behind their mother (starting around 4:15 in this video) And who can forget “Kill da Wabbit” and “Spehwur and Magic Helmut” from “What’s Opera Doc?”

Arts in an Age of Technology, Audience Relations, Marketing/PR

No Comments

Opera Has Sex Fiends? Sign Me Up!

September 9, 2008

by:

Joe Patti

This week the readers of England’s Sun tabloid got the opportunity to attend the opera for between $13 and $52 where the tickets generally run around $175. The Sun announced the opportunity back in July. People had to buy the paper one Sunday to get details so they could enter a lottery for tickets. At the time, there was a bit of negative reaction (note this one is on rival paper, The Guardian) with people decrying it as an ineffectual move since those who normally read the sensationalistic Sun were not the type to return to the opera at regular prices. Some opined that those who liked the regular misogyny exhibited on Page 3 would hardly appreciate high culture.

But the opera in question, Don Giovanni, seems ready made for those who read of the peccadilloes of young lotharios on a daily basis.

In something of an inversion, the unrefined masses got a night in Covent Garden while afficiandos had to satisfy themselves with a simulcast at a movie theatre chain…or wait until another night. (Actually, this characterization makes it sound like a reversal of the usual. In fact, unlike the Metropolitan Opera, this was the Royal Opera House’s first simulcast.)

If you watch the video accompanying the BBC article , you will see the reactions were mixed. Some had a wonderful time and will come again. One woman said it was a nice evening but she wouldn’t hurry back. Another woman listed her concerns over the high cost of attendance (transportation, food) even with the reduced prices. Then there is the guy at the end who proudly proclaims he read the The Guardian.

This illustrates that even when offering reduced tickets, you have to be prepared to answer concerns and motivate people to attend again above and beyond the quality of your product. There was one man quoted in the article as he left at intermission because the seats were uncomfortable.

“We left because it was rather cramped,” said Mrs Tweedy.

“It’s not a reflection on the opera – it was amazing. The voices were great and the lighting was fabulous, but there was a gentleman who decided to share half my seat with me.”

Mr Tweedy said: “It was my first time at the opera – it was ok but after an hour and a half sitting in a cramped seat it was getting a little bit too long for me, but I’d go again.”

This put me in mind of the Urban Institute study on arts attendance I cited a couple years back which found that the two elements that people said would cause them to decide not to attend a performance at a venue again were not having a good social experience and not liking the venue.

It is impossible to say now whether the man will indeed attend again or not despite his experience. Covent Garden has a certain cachet which can’t be overlooked. If this had happened at a less famous facility, perhaps the judgment would have gone against the opera.

Audience Relations, Marketing/PR

2 Comments

Inciting Incidents

September 8, 2008

by:

Joe Patti

I have recently been reminded that it is often a small incident rather than a major one that coalesces people into action. There is often no way to plan and maneuver these events into happening. Rosa Parks sits on a bus. Surely there were other people who did the same thing and met with consequences. Why then? Why that day?

When our new assistant theatre manager started a year ago, he preferred to work at a desk I hadn’t anticipated him wanting. Because we stored often used files and binders in and around the desk, I have often had to ask him to move while I retrieved it. We didn’t have time to reconfigure things until this summer which is when I suggested alternative layouts a number of times. But he never really seemed motivated to do anything. Then Wednesday I asked for his help in running an internet cable through a hole in the wall. Thursday morning I came into work and the whole office was reconfigured. I have gone into work in jeans the last two days to continue with the clean up and rearranging.

Why was the running of that cable the spark that got things going? I have no idea. I would have preferred this all to happen over the summer when I had more time. On the other hand, it provides a welcome break from reviewing last month’s expense and payroll reports.

I had the same thing happen in an online game in which I help create scenarios for players. My attempts to spark interest with subtle and blatant promises of lurking menace and untold riches have gained limited involvement at times. However a group of organizations decided to talk about setting minimum pricing for their wares and the whole game went up in arms with battle lines being drawn between erstwhile allies. I was flabbergasted at the retributive activities and threats that emerged almost immediately between people who had been friends for years and years.

It is pretty clear to people in the arts world at large that a change in the way we do business is both necessary and imminent. The problem is that no one knows what form the change will take or how to bring it to fruition. This is not to say that people aren’t trying. Arts professionals are thinking, talking and doing all sorts of little things that are hopefully greasing the skids for what is to come. But if the change is going to come from an unexpected quarter, by definition there isn’t a lot anyone can do to control its emergence. Despite the best intentions and efforts to facilitate a transition, it could be a rather bumpy ride if people are concentrating their efforts in the wrong areas.

General Musings, State of the Arts

No Comments