Speaking as an O’Donnell, I’d just like to say how proud I am to be Irish today.
In my last post I took a cheap shot at community engagement and I’d like to make amends for that here.
I began by saying that community engagement is not audience development and that arts organizations that need to sell tickets should stay focused on selling tickets. These two things are true and I stand by them 100%.
The cheap shot came when I said this:
“If you want to do engagement, leave it to outreach and education departments that don’t have to generate revenue.”
This comment was aimed at arts leaders who don’t understand engagement and who think it’s something that can be tagged onto an arts organization as a low-level administrative function (“Of course we’re doing engagement; we just hired an outreach and community engagement manager.”) or, God forbid, programmed (“Join us for a special community event!”) or, worse, dumped on the marketing team (“We’re changing the marketing director’s title to Director of Marketing and Community Engagement.”).
These things aren’t engagement, they’re amateur nonprofit foolishness, and I don’t believe for a minute that outreach or education or any other administrative department should be expected to “do” engagement.
Engagement isn’t something you do, it’s something you are, and no amount of administrative wheel spinning will compensate for an organization that hasn’t fully integrated engagement into its organizational culture – beginning at the very the top of the management hierarchy. If you’re looking for a place to put engagement on your flow chart, the appropriate spot is in the square that says CEO or Executive Director. If community engagement isn’t happening there, it is highly unlikely that it’s happening in a meaningful way anywhere further down the line.
Community engagement is the single most important idea being discussed in the cultural sector today. Arts organizations that don’t endeavor to fully understand it, embrace it, absorb it into their operations, and allow it to change the way they relate to their support systems are virtually guaranteeing that they won’t survive this audience crisis. Arts organizations can’t exist without the support of their communities, and the people who comprise those communities won’t support arts organizations to which they have no relevant personal connections.
If your organization still isn’t quite sure what engagement is, or you’re doing engagementy things without the participation of fully engaged leaders, or you’re making frivolous engagement-like noises because funders have been browbeating you into “doing” engagement, you owe it to yourself and your community to go back to square one and start over.
And if you’re not sure how to do that, you might want to talk to Doug Borwick, who is a saint and possibly even a prophet. Doug has been thinking, writing and talking about engagement for a long time. But more importantly, he’s been in the field helping organizations become more successful engagers. He knows what engagement is and he knows how to help organizations make it work. In a time of great uncertainty, when so many traditional arts organizations are destined to fail, Doug is holding up a beacon in the darkness and pointing the way toward salvation. Those who intend to survive would do well to follow his lead.
I’m happy to call Doug a prophet because at the heart of his message is an idea that prophets have been sharing for millennia. It’s both simple and profound and it goes like this:
Love and be loved in return.
If your ailing arts organization is demanding love from an increasingly indifferent community, it’s probably time to venture out into that community and share some love with the people on whom your survival depends.
Or as Doug Borwick would say: Engage!
With audiences in steady decline, ticket sales-dependent arts organizations are destined to shrink or go out of business. The question is not whether this will happen, but how many it will happen to, and which ones will survive.
We won’t know the answer until it happens, of course, but there are a couple of things we can know for certain: The survivors will have abandoned counterproductive nonprofit thinking and they’ll have found new ways to attract sustaining audiences.
If you’d like to count yourself among the survivors, here are a few moldy old arts marketing ideas that need to be tossed right now.
To promote literally means to push forward. Nonprofit arts organizations push forward information about arts events in hopes that avid fans will respond. Unfortunately, avid fans are steadily disappearing and promotion doesn’t work on people who lack avid interest.
In the arts, where survival is now dependent on customers who lack avid interest, promotion is only half the battle. The missing half – a necessary business counterpart to pushing forward – is pulling in. Also known as persuasion or sales.
Tragically, despite decades of chronic audience attrition, arts organizations still rely almost exclusively on pushing forward boastful promotional information.
Anyone who tries to sell you community engagement as audience development is either dishonest or woefully uninformed. Engagement will not, cannot replace sales and marketing as a means of building paid audiences. If your organization has opted to make community engagement a part of your earned revenue strategies, you are wasting valuable resources.
Establishing quality relationships with customers is an excellent idea, but it’s just good sales practice – something businesses have understood for centuries. If you’re a sales-dependent arts organization and you want to earn more revenue, do better sales.
If you want to do engagement, leave it to outreach and education departments that don’t have to generate revenue.
The term “audience development” was coined in the 1980s to appease older arts pros who thought “marketing” sounded too commercial and who wanted the crass business of ticket sales to sound more like the genteel practice of fundraising.
Today there may be nuanced semantic differences between audience development and marketing, but marketing is more focused on sales and will deliver more efficient ROI. Any organization that’s having trouble earning revenue should speak the language of marketing so they stay more focused on earning revenue.
The most efficient way to develop audiences is and has always been to sell a lot of tickets.
DIY Marketing Content
If you develop your own sales and marketing content, you should stop right now. Very few arts organizations have the necessary professional expertise to develop the sort of marketing content that’s necessary for survival, so continuing to publish amateur, do-it-yourself materials is just plain suicidal.
Yes. I’m talking about you.
Yes. I know you’re a big city arts institution that’s been developing your own marketing content for decades.
Yes. Even if you’re in New York.
If you still don’t think I’m talking about you, go to Starbucks and read your latest promotional copy to a 28-year-old tech exec on her coffee break. Watch her face and you’ll know exactly what I mean.
Good marketing content is about the customers and how our products will satisfy their needs and desires. Arts marketing content, meanwhile, is about the products and why arts insiders think customers should find them appealing.
The chief problem with letting amateur nonprofit arts administrators develop their own marketing content is that they can’t resist making it all about themselves and about why they think customers should find them attractive.
If good marketing is about the customers and arts marketing is almost never about the customers, we may have an important clue as to why audiences are disappearing.
Arts organizations that survive this audience crisis will be the ones that stop spraying self-indulgent amateur promotional messages at the world in hopes of somehow magically capturing a larger share of a shrinking fan base. They’ll be the ones that refuse to let squishy nonprofit fads distract them from their primary task, which is building and serving sustaining audiences. And they’ll be the ones that turn their attention – and the content of their communications – away from themselves and toward the audiences on which their futures depend.
If you’re a young arts administrator who wants to have an arts management job in ten or twenty years, you might want to start working now to ensure that outdated nonprofit traditions don’t deprive you of that opportunity.
A publicist, a marketer and a salesperson walk into a bar where they see three gorgeous women sitting across the room. The publicist asks the bartender to send them a round of drinks and say, “The good-looking guy at the bar sent these over.” The women nod their polite thanks.
Next the marketer draws a clever picture with a provocative message on a cocktail napkin and tips the bartender to send it to them. The women read the napkin, smile and acknowledge the men, but return to their conversation.
Finally the sales guy walks over, speaks briefly, sits with the women for a while and eventually the four of them get up and leave together.
The next day the publicist and the marketer ask their colleague how he did it and he says, “Simple. I asked them which one worked better, the drinks or the note, and then listened intently for a very long time.”
The great management theorist Edwards Deming once said:
“Every organization is perfectly designed to get the results it is producing.”
It’s a fascinating way of saying that if your organization isn’t getting the results it wants, the flaw is in the current design. The takeaway is that if your current design isn’t delivering the results you want, you have to fix the design.
It’s an idea that can be applied broadly to organizational systems, or narrowly to sub-systems within an organization, like marketing.
Is your marketing delivering the results you want?
If not, is there something about its design that needs to be changed?
I took a quick tour through several brand new season brochures for America’s top orchestras today and found publications that could easily have been produced thirty years ago. The content and design were historically consistent right down to the conductors on the cover, the shamelessly self-adulatory copy, the stuffy classical music clichés and the complete absence of anything having to do with customers and their experience with the product. The world has changed at lightening speed in the last three decades, yet orchestra administrators remain stubbornly committed to decades-old marketing strategies that produce increasingly unsatisfactory results.
Any business marketing expert will tell you that good marketing is about the customers and the way the product satisfies their needs and desires. American orchestras either haven’t heard this or they refuse to believe it (or they think they’re too far above their customers to come down to their level) because they continue to make their marketing all about themselves and how wonderful they think everyone should think they are. “We don’t design our persuasive appeals around your needs and desires; we tell you how much you should want us… and… and… and… well, you really should want us, because, well… because… Did we tell you how wonderful we are?”
You might find a couple of token nods to audiences in these brochures, but they’re usually shots of concert goers gazing adoringly at the stage (which is a clever way of pretending to make the content about the audience while actually making it about the product) or obligatory shots of young people at an education program. Out of the hundreds of photos I saw, none depicted classical music consumers enjoying themselves with one another at a show – even though socializing with friends & family tops the list of desires that lead people to attend arts events.
(Hint: If you know what motivates your customers to buy your product, you should make it the primary focus of your marketing content.)
(Hint: Read that last hint again. Click the link just above it. Then go get your latest season brochure and do an honest assessment of how much real estate is devoted to the product and how much focuses on the consumers and the extent to which their needs and desires will be satisfied by what you have to offer.)
(Hint: If you’re more than 90% about you, you probably forgot somewhere along the line that it’s not about you anymore.)
Arts audiences are in steady decline throughout the cultural sector and classical musical audiences are declining faster than the rest. Orchestra marketers who want to stop this attrition would do well to ask if their marketing materials, in being designed to focus exclusively on themselves, might be more effective if they were designed to focus on the audience in equal measure.
A misguided political maneuver has backfired spectacularly and in just a few days that innocuous midwestern state with the annual car race and famous hoosier hospitality has become a bloodied battlefield in the culture wars.
By enacting legislation designed to enable Christians to discriminate against gay people the state has found its reputation being ripped to shreds in the media, and its economy is now the focus of a boycott that continues to grow as I write these words. Not the sort of subject I normally cover here, but there are lessons aplenty for anyone who cares about brands.
Here are a few observations on Indiana’s situation that contain cautionary lessons for brand managers in the arts.
Your brand is your reputation. Many older arts pros still think that brands are logos, tag lines or the images we use to decorate our communications, but that’s not the case. Your brand is what people think and feel about you and how those thoughts and feelings influence the way they behave toward you. A week ago Indiana had a great brand, but today it’s in tatters. The state hasn’t really changed, but the brand, which lives in people’s hearts and minds, has been damaged in ways that will take many years to repair.
Managing a brand that exists in the minds and hearts of other people means paying close attention to what those people are thinking and feeling – something arts organizations find difficult to do.
Brands are dynamic. Many arts organizations tie their brands to the universal importance of their art forms and thus assume they are unassailable. But brands, because they live in the hearts and minds of people, are destined to change as attitudes, beliefs and values change. Ten years ago Indiana might have gotten away with a craven ploy to snatch rights away from gay people, but the world has changed and the failure of Indiana politicians to change with it has cost the state dearly.
Managing brands in a changing marketplace means continually adapting brand management tools and strategies – something arts organizations find extremely difficult to do.
Brands can’t be built on bullshit. Arts organizations, because they pay so little attention to their customers’ thoughts and feelings, tend to fill their marketing materials with meaningless bullshit. Indiana governor Mike Pence tried to bullshit his way out of his brand disaster in a now-famous interview with George Stephanopoulos, but it only added fuel to the fire. Others have since tried to finesse Pence’s bullshit, but the world has seen through it and Indiana’s brand has lost its credibility.
Managing a successful brand in a media savvy marketplace means speaking simple truths with deference and humility – something arts organizations find almost impossible to do.
<> <> <>
Most arts organizations won’t have to go through what Indiana’s going through, but that doesn’t make the brand lessons any less important. Arts administrators who don’t quite get brand management, and who design their brands to project their own thoughts and feelings, rather than taking meaningful, proactive steps to shape other people’s thoughts and feelings, have a great deal to lose.
So my advice to arts organizations is this: Engage with your new audiences to learn what’s in their hearts and minds. Change the way you communicate with the world to reflect the way it has changed. And cut the bullshit. You need audiences more than they need you and everybody knows it. Start speaking simple truths with humility and deference and new audiences will beat a path to your door.
As for Indiana, it looks like the good guys are going to prevail and the state’s reputation will be restored. But the cost of earning back the brand equity that Pence and his cronies squandered will be absolutely enormous.
Are you trying to attract audiences with fundraising appeals?
I read a symphony orchestra brochure recently that devoted all of its content to describing how wonderful the organization was, how important classical music was to western civilization and how many great things the orchestra was doing for its community. I knew they were trying to sell me tickets, but I wasn’t at all clear about why they thought I’d buy.
In re-reading it, I got the distinct impression that the people who wrote, designed and published the brochure were asking me to support them with my participation rather than offering me something that I might actually find personally rewarding.
They weren’t asking me to buy, they were asking me to give.
<> <> <>
When the good people in the development department talk to potential donors, their communications are rooted in a set of assumptions that go like this:
- We are valuable to you, to the community and to the larger culture
- We cannot provide this value without your support
- You should give us money so we can continue to be of value
When professional marketers talk to potential buyers, their communications are rooted in a set of assumptions that go like this:
- You have stated needs and desires that we recognize
- The artistic products we sell can satisfy those needs and desires
- We promise that when you buy our products, your needs and desires will be satisfied
You may notice a striking dissimilarity between these sets of assumptions. The development set is self-centered while the marketing set is audience-centered. The development set focuses on the value of the art, artists and institutions while the marketing set stresses fulfillment of the customers’ needs and desires. The development set is rooted in shoulds while the marketing set is rooted in promises. In fundraising, we put ourselves first and ask people to support us. In professional marketing, the customers come first and the emphasis is on satisfying their personal yearnings.
If this description of marketing sounds strange to you, it’s probably because you work in the nonprofit arts where marketing is almost never about the customers. We don’t do professional marketing in the arts; we do arts marketing, which takes its cues not from the marketing profession or from successful businesses, but rather from nonprofit fundraising traditions.
When arts marketers talk to potential buyers, their communications are rooted in a set of assumptions that go like this:
- We are wonderful, important and of value to the community (and to you)
- (You may not know it, but you need us and may, if you try us, desire us)
- You should buy our products so we can be of value to you (and to the community)
Compare these assumptions with the sets above and you’ll see that arts marketing has a lot more in common with fundraising than it does with professional marketing. Arts marketing emerged in a culture dominated by fundraising and fundraising has exerted such a powerful influence that we actually taught ourselves to do marketing backwards: We use an entirely self-centered, self-important form of promotional communication in a vain attempt to motivate sustaining audiences when we should be using customer-centered communication that’s developed in response to our audience’s stated needs and desires.
Why do we do marketing backwards? Because back when arts patrons viewed buying and giving as interdependent parts of the participation process, it didn’t matter. People bought and gave for similar reasons so arts organizations could use similar appeals in their fundraising and marketing pitches. But today, when arts audiences are disappearing at a rate that makes many traditional institutions unsustainable, and new audiences don’t necessarily view arts participation as a social responsibility, the distinction makes all the difference in the world. Marketing that’s rooted in fundraising assumptions doesn’t work anymore and our refusal to embrace legitimate, businesslike, customer-centered marketing practices is quite literally killing us.
If we want traditional arts organizations to survive, we have to assign marketing a level of priority that’s equal to its task. We have to sever the ties that allow marketing to be encumbered by outdated nonprofit traditions. And we have to replace amateur methods with professional approaches that take their cues from best practices outside the insular, fundraising-oriented cultural sector.
Marketing and Development are fundamentally different administrative endeavors. It’s time to separate them and allow each to do its job according to accepted professional standards.