Setting the stage...part 2

In addition to the benefits arts participants seek, there are a number of barriers that arts presenters must overcome. The leisure literature (as cited by McCarthy & Jinnet, 2001) indicates that “the amount and nature of leisure time available to an individual as being central to his or her leisure choices” (p.15). The implication for performing arts participation is the availability of leisure time and how it’s used by target audiences. There are differing views on whether or not Americans have more or less leisure time, but there is consensus that it’s more fragmented and that there are many more choices for leisure activities. Attending live performances, which are scheduled at a specific time and place, are more difficult to fit into busy schedules, especially when compared to arts participation media such as computer games, television and recorded music. The rise in participation rates at arts galleries, museums and historical sites are cited in part as the result of more flexible schedules.

The PARC study of ten communities supports this view and also indicates a number of other barriers to participating in performing arts events (Kopczynski et al, 2004). Depending on the community, one quarter to one third of the respondents indicated that they simply liked to spend their leisure time in other ways. Between six and fourteen percent indicated that the performance did not appeal them. No time to go out was cited equally by non-attendees, occasional, and frequent attendees as the second most significant barrier to participation. No time to attend was the most significant barrier to respondents with children at home. The cost of admission was the only significant barrier cited by occasional attendees more often than non attendees or frequent attendees. Ticket cost was cited as a significant barrier for occasional attendees regardless of education, income or other socio-economic factors.

The literature has also found two dimensions for the leisure choices individuals make. The first dimension separates participants into those that seek entertainment and those that seek fulfillment or enrichment. The second dimension of leisure activity is the social context of participation; that of being self-focused or seeking social experience. The literature has found that self-focused individuals seeking entertainment are more inclined to participate in the arts through the media including television and recordings. Individuals seeking entertainment and social experience are not surprisingly, much more inclined to attend live performances. Individuals that are self-focused and seeking fulfillment have been found to much more likely to experience the arts through hands on participation; those that seek social experiences and fulfillment become frequent attendees. This analysis supports the framework of benefits presented earlier and highlights entertainment and social interaction as the key drivers that arts presenters must excel at to attract and satisfy its customers.

Setting the stage...part 1

In A New Framework for Building Participation in the Arts McCarthy and Jinnet (2001) present a useful behavioral model for understanding how individuals make the decision to participate or not to participate in the performing arts, see Figure 1. The background of the individual is a strong driver of whether or not an individual is inclined to attend a performing arts event. Education and exposure to the arts provides greater familiarity and results in higher levels of enjoyment. Increasing satisfaction and participation lead some to make arts participation an “end in itself” (as cited by McCarthy & Jinnet, 2001, p. 16). This theory is supported by the small number of participants that become frequent attendees and represent a significant percentage of the audience. Background also includes one’s personality; some individuals seek social experiences while others are more self-focused. An individual’s reference group will also impact their inclination to participate; peers may or may not perceive an arts event as an acceptable leisure activity.

Figrue 1. Rand Participation Model (McCarthy & et, 2004, p. 7)9

McCarthy et al (2004) also created a framework for understanding the benefits of the arts, see Figure 2. This framework presents the benefits of the arts participation on a continuum between private and public benefit. The benefits are divided into those that are intrinsic to the arts and those that are a result of participation but also available from other activities (instrumental). Their review of the literature found evidence that instrumental benefits included increased cognitive skills, improved attitudes and behaviors, better health, increased socialization and contributions to economic activity. Intrinsic benefits included captivation, pleasure, expanded capacity for empathy, cognitive growth, the creation of social bonds and expression of communal meanings.

Figure 2. Benefits of the Arts Framework (McCarthy & al, 2004, p. 4). 

It is within this framework of benefits that arts presenters seek to “to enhance and enrich the cultural development and awareness” of their communities; to “entertain” “educate” and “enlighten” their audiences; both “enhancing and enriching quality of life”. It is this set of benefits, both private and public, that are at the core of the customer value proposition. The set of benefits also alludes to two separate sets of customers with distinct yet overlapping value propositions. The primary customer is the individual who directly participates in the art activity; social institutions seeking to improve community life form a secondary market for the arts presenter.

A balanced approach...

Since the 1980’s and the cultural wars over funding questionable projects, the arts have been under increasing pressure to assess their effectiveness in delivering the mission driven benefits claimed by supporters. In this context, direct and indirect costs of presenting the performing arts have risen significantly; funding organizations are shifting priorities toward human services initiatives; and the financial performance of endowments have further reduced arts organizations operating budgets. Recent corporate and accounting scandals have created an environment for more transparent business practices in all organizations. For many performing arts organizations, their very survival is at stake as contributors and audiences look for accountability, access and meaningful experiences that justify the significant investments in facilities and programming.

A large segment of the performing arts field is mission driven, enabled by the financial support of individuals, the government, foundations and corporations. Financial support is seen as an enabler providing access to what many consider the essential benefits that only the arts can provide. A summation of the role of the performing arts can found in the vision statement of the Association for Arts Presenters (2011), the leading trade association of arts presenters:

“The Association envisions a world where all people experience the transformative power of live performance and the performing arts presenting field is strong and vibrant—a world where performing artists are integral to all communities, where ideas circulate vigorously and freely, and where people from all cultures affirm and understand themselves and each other through the arts". Vision statements for individual performing arts presenters further develop this theme with phrases that include: “to enhance and enrich the cultural development and awareness” of their communities; to “entertain” “educate” and “enlighten” their audiences; both “enhancing and enriching quality of life”

So what strategies best deliver the results not for profit presenters are looking for? Using the concepts of Kaplan and Norton’s (1996, 2001, 2004) balanced scorecard, we can define and clarify these strategies; align them with the mission statement; and develop actionable, measurable objectives that successfully deliver the benefits your organization and patrons are looking for.

How do you know?

Are the operations of your organization delivering on it's mission statement? Are they doing so efficiently, making the most the organization's physical, financial and human resources? Are they sustainable? How do you know?

These are questions every member of an organization should be able to ask themselves and honestly answer. I say honestly, as the cultures of many organizations claim transparency, but very few practice it. Many topics are not discus-sable as the answers have personal, political and organizational consequences are challenging. But if your organization is really committed to its mission, qualitative and quantitative metrics can help identify strengths and reveal weaknesses. 

Self knowledge is essential to both the individual and the organization, build on strengths, mitigate weaknesses.