Posts filed under ‘audience development’
Arts Marketing Standards Are Now Available – updated
Some very useful resources have been developed by the UK Arts Marketing Association (AMA) in response to the National Occupational Standards .
National Occupational Standards (NOS) specify the standards of performance that people are expected to achieve in their work, and the knowledge and skills they need to perform effectively. The marketing NOS were adapted by the AMA for those working in the arts and cultural sector.
The result is a set of standards which explain what skills and knowledge marketers should have at each stage of their arts marketing career.
You can access the Full Standards online and they are also available as relevant to four levels of marketing roles:
Level 1 – Assistant – officer
Level 2 – Senior Officer – new manager
Level 3 – Manager
Level 4 – Head of department/director
The AMA have also produced some ‘toolkits’ to outline how the standards might be used by those in marketing roles, by their employers and by arts marketing trainers.
3 November, 2011 at 11:02 am Tim Roberts ARTS Australia Leave a comment
Beyond Bums on Seats: Participatory Arts Practices
On his blog, The Artful Manager, Andrew Taylor has looked at the recent publication released by the James Irvine Foundation Getting In On the Act: How Arts Groups are Creating Opportunities for Active Participation
The research includes a model developed by authors Alan Brown and Jennifer Novak-Leonard (in partnership with Shelly Gilbride) of WolfBrown. Part of a larger five stage model, the three participatory stages are detailed to the right. The participatory stages includes: ‘crowd sourcing’ to ‘co-creation’ to ‘audience-as-artist’ .
The report also includes some instructive case studies sourced from around the world.
As the report suggests, we need to be exploring new ways to connect with an ever evolving audience.
1 November, 2011 at 10:18 am Tim Roberts ARTS Australia Leave a comment
Crowd Sourcing Meets Audience Sourcing, or is it just Audience Choice?
Some interesting trends for the future in Brazilian viewers choose what gets screened in local cinemas.
Mobz, a cinema chain in Brazil, hopes to make use of digital cinema to broadcast of live events, concerts, movies and more.
There is no programmer or “central decision-maker (who) chooses what gets shown, however; rather, local consumers are invited to vote on the site for the shows or films they want to see. When enough people vote for a particular screening, Mobz negotiates the details with the content owners and theaters, and viewers can then buy their tickets through the site. Mobz promotes the screening over social networks, and provided a minimum number of tickets are sold, the event or film is then aired. If the quota is not met, then those who had bought tickets are fully refunded.“
This is a similar model to that successfully applied by the filmakers of Four Eyed Monsters to build audiences for their film outside the traditional distributor model. Social networks are used to spread the word and, in effect, consumer advocacy drives the audience development.
While this is unlikely to have immediate applicability to whole live performances, maybe we will see more audience sourced content like that on a recent tour by Rufus Wainwright (for the Baby Boomer challenged, yes the son of Loudon III). The audience could vote in advance for the choice of songs that Rufus sang on an evening.
You will note that I have not, however, suggested cast selection reminiscent of Big Brother!
24 October, 2011 at 7:53 am Tim Roberts ARTS Australia Leave a comment
How do you assess loyalty? What is loyal?
How do you assess what is working in a loyalty program?
Of course, the first thing to decide is how you measure success.
It is often suggested that a loyalty program is working if it accomplishes at least one of two objectives:
- clients are either holding onto their customers longer or,
- are getting them to spend more with the brand.
Kobie Marketing believes that there is only one variable for measuring loyalty – engagement.
“Engagement is a minimum threshold variable that can measure individual member’s contributions to the program’s bottom line. In other words, if a member has an actively engaged relationship with the brand and program, we should measure their contribution. If the relationship is passive, we say don’t include them in positive performance metrics.“
McKinsey in The Consumer Decision Journey discusses these different kinds of loyalty – active and passive:
“Of consumers who profess loyalty to a brand, some are active loyalists, who not only stick with it but also recommend it. Others are passive loyalists who, whether from laziness or confusion caused by the dizzying array of choices, stay with a brand without being committed to it. Despite their claims of allegiance, passive consumers are open to messages from competitors who give them a reason to switch.“
This suggests that we may need the reality of a harsher measure of loyalty in the arts and entertainment to move beyond the false expectations of a fickle passive loyalty. Much of the shadow audience can only be considered passively loyal and the audience attracted to one of your shows only when it is a hit is at best – passively loyal. Actively loyal supporters are more valuable as they will support the challenging rather than just the easy or safe bets.
I have seen it quoted we should measure audiences not by tickets, but by customers. The view above adds another qualifier to measuring audience loyalty to only actually counting those actively engaged.
14 October, 2011 at 1:06 pm Tim Roberts ARTS Australia Leave a comment
A Candid Discussion of the Approach to a Simple Segmentation
Sam Freeman on his blog Dark Laughs discusses his frustrations with the expense of brochures amongst other issues and his enthusiasm for newer approaches:
“There is much credit given to the “coffee table” appeal of brochures as something to be revered, perhaps it might be brought out over a dinner with friends while dipping some of that modern marvel french bread into the cheese fondue.” 
I can not argue with his logic that a simple segmentation may assist his marketing. He approaches that with an analysis of recency and frequency within the parameters of the communication permissions of UK Data Protection.
It is as he says a work in progress with updates to be posted on his blog in the post Small Scale Segmentation.
12 October, 2011 at 7:28 am Tim Roberts ARTS Australia 1 comment
So simple, but this could be a great use of transaction data to quantify RFM
This may well be old news to some, but I just loved the simplicity and the subsequent actionability (is that a word?).
I want a ticketing system that offers such a simple KPI of engagement. Gotta copyright that! BUT, you have to start with data that can identify individual customers and build a history of transactions.
Hmmmm, I gotta try this out. Let me know if you do before I do.
Is Recency the Most Important Factor to Drive Engagement?
Oh, I like his name of the source too, Email Yogi: your guide to multi-channel enlightenment
20 September, 2011 at 11:16 am Tim Roberts ARTS Australia Leave a comment
Are personalised search and online preferences narrowing our worldview?
Are algorithms editing our life and our choices? Kevin Slavin thinks so and presents a worrying picture in How algorithms shape our world (above).
You will be aware that there is no standard Google. Even if not logged in, Google takes into account 57 individual data points about YOU before serving you the results you searched for.
Algorithms are used to predict preferences or taste based on behaviour and recommend options. Do we risk saying goodbye to serendipity and innovation?
It is worrying though that a recent study at Columbia University found that a reliance on search engines for answers is actually changing the way humans think.
“Since the advent of search engines, we are reorganising the way we remember things. Our brains rely on the internet for memory in much the same way they rely on the memory of a friend, family member or co-worker,” said report author Betsy Sparrow.
Also exploring this subject, Eli Pariser warns us to Beware online “filter bubbles”.
The same stuff again and again is not satisfying, Pariser suggests we get trapped in a “Filter Bubble”. He warns that personalised search might be narrowing our worldview. A Filter Bubble is your own personal universe online, but the risk is that you don’t decide what is in it and you don’t see what is excluded or edited out
We rely less and less on our own critical faculties and word of mouth and more on what Mr Slavin calls the “physics of culture”. Pariser uses the analogy that algorithms are delivering the lowest common denominator – junk food, rather than a balanced diet. Search results and recommendations should not just keyed to relevance, but should expand a person’s horizon. He suggests five equally important weighting criteria:
- relevant
- important
- uncomfortable
- challenging
- other points of view
Hmmmmmm, sounds like a good premise for audience development in the arts to me.
Slavin moots a concept “the physics of culture” and discussed the recommendations of Netflix which account for 60% of films rented. Netflix has used a variety of agorithms to recommend films, Cinematch, Gravity and now the ominous sounding Pragmatic Chaos.
Just as we need a balanced diet of food, we similarly benefit and grow from a healthy balanced diet of politics and culture. We need in effect a benevolent editor and Pariser suggests journalistic ethics encouraged this in the newspaper industry a century ago. Although it sounds like those ethics need to be revisited now Mr Murdoch.
24 August, 2011 at 2:40 pm Tim Roberts ARTS Australia Leave a comment
If we’re going to f$#@ subscribers, we should tell them we love them first …
Thomas Cott brought this to my attention an Interview with Michael Ritchie Artistic Director of the Centre Theatre Group in LA by Theresa Rebeck on HowlRound.
He shares his perspective as a producer to a variety of marketing issues such as subscriptions, memberships, pricing and discounting. The programming focus makes for interesting (if not colourful) reading:
“… fuck subscribers. I’m so tired of subscribers. They drive me nuts; they’re strangling me; I hate them. I don’t care how good they are; I don’t care how much money they bring in. Fuck subscribers! And someone there at the table said well if we’re going to fuck them we should tell them we love them first, and we should figure out a way that we can fuck them but they stay anyway. How could we have it all?“
7 July, 2011 at 5:04 pm Tim Roberts ARTS Australia Leave a comment
Tools and tips for assessing the impacts of arts programs
Intrinsic Impact has been launched by WolfBrown as a free resource for arts managers, board members, students and others who work in the cultural sector. The site aims to change the conversation about the benefits of arts participation, disseminate up-to-date information on emerging practices in impact assessment, and encourage cultural organizations to embrace impact assessment as standard operating practice.
“How are people transformed by arts and cultural experiences? This question cuts to the core of both policy and practice in the cultural sector. Yet, aside from talking to audience members at intermission or watching visitors as they move through an exhibition at a museum, the sector lacks an established means of assessing non-financial outcomes.“
“While much has been written about the economic, social and other instrumental benefits of arts programs (i.e., the arts as an instrument of achieving some other end), the intrinsic benefits of cultural programmes have not been investigated with much regularity. One might argue, however, that without intrinsic impact, other benefits cannot occur. In other words, if the experience itself is unremarkable and does not create meaning, it is quickly forgotten and little benefit accrues.“
“We assume that audiences and visitors are different, somehow, after an arts program than they were when they first walked in the door. But, how are they different? Is it possible to measure what happens to people in their seats in a theatre or concert hall, or as they stroll through a museum or gallery? Do different kinds of cultural experiences create different impacts?“
“The answers to these questions could shed new light on how arts and cultural organizations create public value, and could profoundly influence both policy and practice.“
The Australia Council for the Arts has also explored the issue of Artsistic Vibrancy with the assistance of WolfBrown.
5 July, 2011 at 11:24 am Tim Roberts ARTS Australia Leave a comment
To Groupon or not to Groupon …
That is the question!
I would suggest that the challenge for the arts (in particular) is not attract audiences once – but to get them to reattend, let alone with frequency.
“It is a great way to get people in to try your arena,” says Chad Nason, a Groupon spokesman.
Yes discounting can be one way to encourage trial, but the real risk is discounting the perceived value.
“… the burden is on us to put the best deal out there for places that people will go back to for full prices,” says Chad Nason, a Groupon spokesman. That seems an unwinnable challenge to me for a discounter?
The opportunity cost is significant “You are only making 25 percent of the full-ticket price,” says Melissa Grande, director of marketing for Pittsburgh Irish and Classical Theatre.
But beyond the size of the discount, the major handicap to the audience development potential of Groupon and similar discount schemes is that they do not provide the names and contact details of purchasers who redeem the offer. So, there is no way to continue (or even) start to engage with these first time attendees attracted by the discount and build an ongoing relationship.
Read more about Groupon in Can group coupons deliver what cultural groups want most: Repeat customers and revenue?
20 June, 2011 at 1:08 pm Tim Roberts ARTS Australia Leave a comment
