Marketing Tools and Strategies – Supplementary Reading

Table of Contents

AUDIENCE ENGAGEMENT ...... 2 “TCG to Study and Share ‘Audience Engagement Models that Work”...... 2 “Will Funders Stop Supporting Theaters that don’t Engage Audiences?” ...... 2 “It’s Frustrating to Seek Funds Outside Community in which Art is Made” ...... 3 “Breaking Down the Walls to Make Audience Engagement Essential” ...... 3 “The Future of Audience Engagement, using ” ...... 4 DEVELOPING YOUNG AUDIENCES ...... 5 “You Want Young? Start by Changing Arts Conferences” ...... 5 “The Fallacy of the Arts’ ‘Savior Demographic’ (Younger Audiences)” ...... 5 DIVERSITY ...... 6 “Where does the Responsibility lie for the lack of Diversity in the Arts?” ...... 6 “Use Online Social Networks to Reach Spanish-Preferring Audiences” ...... 6 INCREASING COMMUNICATION ...... 7 “Wanna Sell More Subs? Cut Ads and Up Direct Mail, Telemarketing” ...... 7 “Wanna get More Press? Twitter Moves Faster than any Press Release” ...... 7 RACE ...... 8 “Talking About Racial Inequality and Arts Funding” ...... 8 OTHER ...... 9 “Remember the Entire Experience” ...... 9 “Using Social Bridging to be ‘for Everyone’ in a New Way” ...... 10

AUDIENCE ENGAGEMENT

“TCG to Study and Share ‘Audience Engagement Models that Work” Teresa Eyring on the Theatre Communications Group blog, 3/26/12

The old saying has it that laws are like sausages -- the less you know about how they are made, the more you like them. Theatre, however, may be more like a garden, and increasingly, audiences want to get their hands dirty. In every community I've visited of late...theatres are experiencing increased audience interest in the behind-the-scenes process of theatre. This anecdotal evidence is borne out by Theatre Facts 2010, with attendance at workshops and readings increasing 29% and attendance at event offerings like backstage tours, talkbacks and cabarets rising an astounding 47% over a 5-year period. Clearly, a lot has changed since we first published Danny Newman's Subscribe Now! in 1977... and recently, there's been a surge of audience research. To create a comprehensive home to better share, measure and implement this knowledge across the entire field, we are thrilled to announce our new Audience (R)Evolution program. Unfolding over three years, [this program] will feature four phases: research and assessment, a convening, grant-making and widespread dissemination of audience engagement models that work.

“Will Funders Stop Supporting Theaters that don’t Engage Audiences?” Rebecca Novick, HowlRound.com, 3/7/12

Recently, the James Irvine Foundation announced that it would shift the majority of its support to projects that expand how Californians engage actively in the arts "by making or practicing art." In a report on the subject for the Irvine Foundation, Alan Brown writes: People are thinking about the experience of culture differently than in the past, placing value on a more immersive and interactive experience than is possible through mere observation.... Increasingly, Americans want to meet the people who make our products, share in the work of the makers and make things ourselves. Does this signal the beginning of a de-investment by funders in the presentation of conventional plays in conventional venues? Is the implied suggestion here that we should never do a conventional production of Hamlet again? Ben Cameron, head of arts funding at the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, likes to compare the current culture shift with the Protestant Reformation. He parallels that with the current advent of various technologies that are allowing for an un-intermediated engagement between the art and the individual -- YouTube videos, "concert-quality" sound through headphones, higher-quality on- demand television, and movies. Who needs an institution in that world? As Cameron says, the Reformation was not a great time to be monastery. [M]any theaters are beginning to take some steps towards a more inclusive, open, democratized way of working. If we want more theaters in the field to begin to change, we must chart these early steps and acknowledge the importance of beginning. This won't look like never doing Hamlet again, but it may look like telling stories from other traditions as well, developing new work in concert with the communities we hope to engage, gradually blurring the lines between professional and amateur, and creating other programs that receive as much focus and investment as the performance of classic plays by professional artists. There's a democratizing wind blowing through our culture and a growing sense that everyone deserves the opportunity to be a maker. Theater institutions can be part of making that possible, or they can continue to be gate-keepers, deploying their formidable resources on behalf of just a few anointed artists, performing in front of ever-shrinking audiences.

“It’s Frustrating to Seek Funds Outside Community in which Art is Made” Founding Director Adam J. Thompson on the DTP website, 2/1/12

When I founded The Deconstructive Theatre Project in 2006...I wanted audiences to understand the full life cycle of a piece of theatre...how is something made? How can it be made differently? How do artists and audiences communicate both inside and outside of the performance arena? How can performance reveal process? I want The Deconstructive Theatre Project to prove the value of collaboration and to steer individuals away from a concern over individual ownership. All art is by nature stolen. The Deconstructive Theatre Project champions a collective trading and shaping of ideas and a shared ownership of curiosity, process, failure, and success. I want our community to be an extension of this collective mindset. It is frustrating to see communities lose investment in the presence of art. It is frustrating also to be driven to seek funding for artistic process outside of the community in which the work is being made. This happens, I think, because artists and their larger communities do not communicate with one another as regularly as they ought to. There has been a lot of talk about transparency lately. I think the entire artistic process should be transparent and the community should be invited to view and partake in it. The rehearsal room is sacred, yes; but keeping it sacred is not a matter of barring the outside world from entry, but rather a process of empowering that outside world with the tools necessary to understand that sacredness and its local, national, and global value. Just as I hope The Deconstructive Theatre Project teaches artists to forsake concerns over individual ownership in favor of the powers of collective mentality, I aim to inspire the company's audiences with that same shared investment in the failures, successes, and livelihood of our members and of our work.

“Breaking Down the Walls to Make Audience Engagement Essential” HowlRound.com, 2/29/12

An excerpt from a "manifesto" by Arena Stage's literary manager Amrita Ramanan presented as part of the American Voices New Play Institute's 21st Century Literary Office Convening that took place February 24 & 25, 2012 in Washington, DC: Unique methods of interaction and conversation with audiences become essential, viewed as the broth for a soup rather than the saltines sprinkled on top. I look at audience engagement at Steppenwolf Theatre Company, with a post-show conversation following every performance facilitated by staff, interns and volunteers, or the Woolly Mammoth Theater Company -- with playful, interactive lobby displays through their Connectivity department that encourage the girl that religiously follows Indian Standard Time to arrive at the theater way before show time. This idea of engagement pre and post-show celebrates the experience of the art and the dialogue generated from it rather than assuming that two or three hours in a dark house are enough. Long gone are the days when we took the intimacy of the work onstage so seriously and didn't care about the tone set from the moment the audience steps through the door. During the 2011 LMDA conference, Keynote Speaker Adam Lerner talked about how, "We spend so much time being excellent that we forget how to be awesome." The value of a fun, synergetic atmosphere and more face-time becomes customary rather than an anomaly. > Click here to watch a video of all five manifestos from the convening.

“The Future of Audience Engagement, using Social Media” An interview with consultant Shane Hudson by August Schulenburg, TCG Circle blog, 3/22/12

What is the biggest misconception about social media holding theatres back? There are three misconceptions. First, social media doesn't sell tickets. Theatres should look at social media as an outreach tool, as a way to connect with patrons and potential patrons, and as a way to listen to what others are saying. Oh, and don't use social media to try to get young people to the theatre. Focus on your programming and your mission. Yes, young people are the most active users of social media, but the fastest growing demographic on is women ages 55 and above! Second, there is no "right" way to use social media, but there are many wrong ways. Theatres need to experiment with what works because each theatre, and each audience, is different. What are the wrong ways? Refusing to use social media at all, being scared of social media and the threat of negative feedback, and using social media as a bullhorn are all ways to use social media incorrectly. Finally, stop worrying so much about ROI. What is the ROI on word of mouth, and how do you measure it? New tools are being developed all the time to assist in measuring the ROI of social media, but the most important thing is to have an active presence and commit to developing relationships.

DEVELOPING YOUNG AUDIENCES

“You Want Young? Start by Changing Arts Conferences” Shoshana Fanizza, Audience Development blog, 6/15/12

Due to [lack of] funds, I am only able to go to one conference a year. [But] Twitter has been so incredible for following conferences around the globe. Recorded keynotes have also been helpful. Recently I was watching the final keynote for the League of American Orchestras conference, "A Call to Action" by Clive Gillinson. His actual speech begins about the 30 minute mark. I loved what he had to say since it was forward-thinking. Become a part of the community and ask what you can do for them rather what can be done for your organization, etc. However, the delivery, the presentation and how he was dressed, was very formal and old school. I have been thinking that, in order to "get outside of the box," perhaps we need to let our hair down more at these conferences instead of being so gosh darn formal. Which brings me to the "You want young?" part of this post. We all need/want younger audiences, right? Many times, at these conferences, we hear from the older generations. Very few conferences have younger speakers as a main event. Are we listening to our younger generations? Are we allowing them to get their viewpoint across to us? If we want younger audiences, maybe we need to start listening to our younger participants. I hope in the future to see more diversity in our conferences if this is what we are truly striving for. I am grateful to see some exceptions, but for the most part, older white guys are still ruling the roost.

“The Fallacy of the Arts’ ‘Savior Demographic’ (Younger Audiences)” Composer/musician Jon Silpayamanant on his blog Mae Mai, 6/14/12

The received wisdom from the "classical music is failing" camp is that the industry must get a bigger [and younger] audience to offset the performance income gap (the gap between performance revenue and operating costs). The figures show a steady decline from roughly 70% [to] 90% of ticket revenue covering total expenses (back in 1937) to between 35% and 40% of ticket revenue covering expenses today (less for opera and ballet). In other words, the performance income gap is increasingly showing us that there are structural deficits built into an industry which cannot have an increase in production to offset rising costs due to inflation. This is known as the Baumol Cost Disease. Lisa Hirsch and I have been having a conversation about the similarities of the sports industry with regards to the Cost Disease. The basic idea is that sports teams function no differently than orchestras in so far as they are just as prone to the Cost Disease since it will still take as many players to play a game today as it did a hundred years ago. But [the sports industry] is considered "profitable" while [classical music] is increasingly being referred to as being in crisis. What has made up the shortfall in performance revenue for sports then? [A major] revenue source [is] television. The odd thing about television is that [advertisers] look at the demographics of the viewership. The magic demographic is 18-49. The older demographic is demonized by television because it doesn't fit into the demographic that businesses arguably consider the best to target (i.e. the 18-49). The irony is, with an aging population, this is making less and less sense since the buying power of the older demographic is so much higher. But this bias against aging audiences is being seen replicated in talk about the demographic of audiences for classical music. DIVERSITY

“Where does the Responsibility lie for the lack of Diversity in the Arts?” Clayton Lord, ArtsJournal.com "New Beans" blog, 12/12/11

A couple weeks ago, I was the recipient of a string of emails that are making the rounds -- emails stemming from a lack of diversity in the panelists at this year's National Arts Marketing Project Conference. What particularly caught me up is the very hard question of where the responsibility for a lack of diversity lives, and who can and cannot truly move the dial. The problem of diversity is neither unique to theatre nor rooted in theatre. But to address [it], we need to pull away from the immediate inequities of our field and try and access the root. And for a lot of experts, that root is within an activity held in common by almost every child in this country: going to school. Since 1982, the number of young people who have had any arts education in school has fallen by between 30% and 50%, depending on the genre. Not surprisingly, this shift has often occurred more quickly in less affluent school districts, which in turn, eternally underpin the racial inequities in this country. Richard Kessler calls this the "arts education gap." The inequities in arts education are not, unfortunately, only affecting eventual audience members. Such a chronic lack of access may also have decreased the pool of eventual trustees, administrators and artists. A disproportionate number of the students who get degrees in, and pursue a career in, the arts are white. Yes, we need to figure out ways to diversify our staffs, our boards and our audiences. But we need to be clear that the problem, while a shared responsibility of all, is not, in fact, a simple question of hiring committees "trying harder" or conference selection panels making a more concerted effort. Those things should absolutely happen. But they have to happen in a context -- and that context needs to be shifted through advocacy, education, artistic connection, concerted group effort and (most frustratingly) time.

“Use Online Social Networks to Reach Spanish-Preferring Audiences” ChiefMarketer.com, 4/28/09

Research [has demonstrated] that ethnic minorities, including Spanish-preferring , visit social networking sites more frequently than non- whites. There are several social networks that can be used to reach this audience including MySpace Latino, Páginas Personales, 's Tu Mundo, Espacio , Univision's Mi Página, and QuePasa.com. There are more than 1 million Spanish- preferring U.S. Hispanics on Facebook... [where] marketers now have the ability to target users by language preference -- a cost effective vehicle for local advertisers looking to tap into this loyal audience.

INCREASING COMMUNICATION

“Wanna Sell More Subs? Cut Ads and Up Direct Mail, Telemarketing” Chad Bauman on his blog Arts Marketing, 9/18/11

Prior to 2008, 25% of our subscription budget was allocated to advertising. After exhaustive efforts, we could not trace a single subscription purchase back to our advertising campaigns. Therefore, we cut all subscription advertising, and refocused those resources on direct mail and telemarketing. In doing so, we completely revamped our direct mail and telemarketing campaigns. In terms of direct mail, we would previously print hundreds of thousands of season brochures, and then mail them out in a few rounds of massive mailings. Our brochures were 28 to 32 pages in length, and functioned more as a branding tool than a sales piece. Today, we send out 30+ direct mail pieces during each subscription campaign that specifically tailor the offer to the target. We have eliminated our subscription brochure, cut our design costs by 60%, and have directed all of our resources to testing message and offer. For more information on our new approach to direct mail, please read "The Future of the Season Brochure." While retooling direct mail, we also invested heavily in telemarketing. If executed properly, many patrons actually view telemarketing as a service, as it allows them the opportunity to discuss the plays with a seasoned caller and to ask any questions they may have. As the economy worsened, we found that many potential subscribers needed personal interaction with a friendly and knowledgeable sales agent in order to make a commitment.

“Wanna get More Press? Twitter Moves Faster than any Press Release” Mark Shenton, The Stage Theatre Blog, 9/16/11

Twitter moves faster than any press release used to be able to. My inbox is routinely flooded with them. I immediately tweet the headline if they're noteworthy, and watch as it is in turn re-tweeted and, more importantly, commented on. [Now] some theatres are cutting out the middle man of the journalist to process and distribute the news for them. Just this week the National Theatre sent out a tweet about a new production of She Stoops to Conquer that will be staged in January that was complete news to me. Usually the National does a fantastic job of keeping journalists informed of what is going on, but here Twitter knew first. It turns out that news of the production leaked last weekend via a story in the Sunday Mirror, of all improbable theatre sources. And the National, rather than issuing a release in the usual way to follow it up after their scoop had been stolen, decided to tweet it. The National's head of press Lucinda Morrison told me, "Twitter provided a quick and effective way for us to confirm and amplify the story. It's the first time we've 'announced' a show that way, but probably not the last. Personally I see it as adding to our communication options, depending on the circumstances, not necessarily replacing the traditional press release - yet, anyway!" Of course I want to protect my patch, but I do wonder that if journalists start becoming redundant, so will the PRs that are there to serve us - perhaps the theatres can simply employ the social media department of the marketing office to do the job for them.

RACE

“Talking About Racial Inequality and Arts Funding” Janet Brown, Grantmakers in the Arts blog, 6/20/12

On June 11-13, 2012, thirty individuals met at the August Wilson Center for African American Culture in Pittsburgh for a GIA Thought Leader Forum on Racial Equity Grantmaking. They were all there because they were experienced arts funders working in social justice. As we planned the event, it became more evident that we could not talk about how grantmaking could be more racially equitable until we had talked about the inequities in our communities based on race. We often seek simple programmatic answers to systemic issues in this funder business. So instead of bringing in a facilitator to help us find solutions, GIA hired the People's Institute for Survival and Beyond. PISB does workshops on "undoing racism" around the country and have for the past thirty years. They didn't come to help us change our grantmaking programs. They came to help us understand systems that have created the world in which we operate. Not simple, not without finger-pointing and blame. As with most difficult conversations, it became personal for those in the room, because we cannot separate who we are from what we do. We talked race for two days. We didn't come up with a list of how to solve the problem of inequities and racism in our communities. We decided we needed to walk with this conversation for a while and then revisit how we will proceed. For funders, this was a brave and unusual step. For an old programmer like me who likes results and action, it was unsettling. But we did it. I left Pittsburgh and travelled to South Dakota to see my family. South Dakota has a very poor history of white and Native American relationships. I found myself having a different kind of conversation with my friends and relatives there - - a more honest conversation about race and privilege and institutionalized systems. Then I started hearing from others who were in Pittsburgh and discovered they were having the same experience. These individuals were looking at professional challenges and opportunities differently and sharing those observations with colleagues, family members and friends. So stay tuned. I don't know where this is going and I don't have the answers. But I know we have to create a common vocabulary for what we are trying to change before we can change anything.

OTHER

“Remember the Entire Experience” Chad Bauman on his Arts Marketing Blog, 9/7/08

Recently Arena Stage held a couple of focus groups about membership programs at Shugoll Research in Bethesda, MD. While I was there trying to figure out whether or not a membership program could supplement our subscription options, I learned another lesson entirely.

Our first group was with recent lapsed subscribers, and we asked them why they decided not to renew their subscription. We got several answers that we anticipated--our move to temporary venues while our new building is being built, the selection of shows, not enough time, don't want to commit, etc. And I got some answers that I completely wasn't expecting: --"I love the productions, but I was having a tough time getting a cab after the performance, even though I asked house management prior to the show. I don't want to stand around for a half hour waiting on one." --"I understand your move to Crystal City, but do you really have to charge $5 for a cup of coffee at concessions." --"Parking is going to be difficult at the Lincoln Theatre. I know you have valet parking, but at such a large venue, it is going to take forever to get our vehicle."

These issues had nothing to do with the product, the sales vehicles, the messaging, or anything else that a marketer normally thinks about. They have to do with the entire experience. Reflecting on these comments, I have made it my number one commitment that we will provide the best overall experience of any theater in the metro area. To do this, we have changed the way we do business, and are looking for more opportunities every day.

We now: 1. Offer free coffee and cookies at every performance, and for every patron. Our customer service mission includes positioning ourself as "warm and friendly." What is more warm and friendly then free coffee and cookies. 2. We are working with our valet company to get the timing of every vehicle return down to 10 minutes, which is quite an accomplishment in DC on a Friday evening. We are using shuttles to shuttle valet drivers back and forth so they don't have to run to vehicles, and therefore don't get fatigued or winded. I literally have stood at the front of the theater with our Director of Audience Services and have timed the delivery of cars. We still have a little way to go, but are making headway. 3. We now require our ushers to wear black and white, and have brand new name badges. They are trained to welcome each guest at the door, route them to the free cookie and coffee bar, and then thank them when they leave. We actively seek ways in which we can go out of our way to help people (i.e. loaning an arm to an elderly patron to assist in getting out of a vehicle, walking people to a nearby restaurant, etc.) 4. We have opened our house to both food and drink. I initially thought this was going to be a disaster and we would have to increase our cleaning staff, but our audiences are very respectful of the space and there haven't been any issues. And our patrons love taking food and drink into the space. 5. We started a Money Back Guarantee for our subscribers. If they don't like the first show, we will refund their subscription. This puts the pressure on us to solve every problem they have, and to provide the best service. 6. I moved a significant amount of funds into a "customer service" allocation. If we make a mistake, or it is perceived that we made a mistake, not only will we fix it, but we will make sure our customers leave happy. If this means buying them drinks, giving them a restaurant gift certificate, a free CD, or something else, we have funds for this purpose.

These are just a couple of things off the top of my head. I am very lucky in that I have a Director of Audience Services who is phenomenal, and is just as committed to this as I am. If you have any great ideas, please share...

“Using Social Bridging to be ‘for Everyone’ in a New Way” Nina Simon, Museum 2.0 blog, 5/8/13

Like a lot of organizations, my museum struggles with two conflicting goals: 1) The museum should be for everyone in our community. 2) It's impossible for any organization to do a great job being for everyone. At the Santa Cruz Museum of Art & History, we're approaching this challenge through social bridging. We intentionally develop events and exhibitions that matchmake unlikely partners -- opera and ukulele, Cindy Sherman and amateur photographers, welding and knitting. Our goal is to bring people together across difference and build a more cohesive community. For more than a year now, what started as a series of experiments and happy accidents is now embedded in how we develop and evaluate projects. We've seen surprising and powerful results -- visitors from different backgrounds getting to know each other, homeless people and museum volunteers working together, artists from different worlds building new collaborative projects. Visitors now spontaneously volunteer that "meeting new people" and "being part of a bigger community" are two of the things they love most about the museum experience. This has led to a surprising outcome: we are now de-targeting many programs. This isn't just a philosophical shift -- it's also being driven by visitors' behavior. "Family Art Workshops" suffer from anemic participation whereas multi-generational festivals are overrun with families. Single-speaker lectures languish while lightning talks featuring teen photographers, PhD anthropologists, and professional dancers are packed. Programs that emphasize bringing diverse people together are more popular than those that serve intact groups. Why fight it?