Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
5 Studies on Audience Participation/Engagement The Tangled Web engagement through social media Making Sense of Audience Engagement the long arc of audience engagement Getting In on the Act the rise of “active participation” The Arts Ripple Effect - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
5 Studies on Audience Participation/Engagement
- The Tangled Web- engagement through social media
- Making Sense of Audience Engagement- the long arc of audience engagement
- Getting In on the Act- the rise of “active participation”
- The Arts Ripple Effect- encouraging value by taking art from private to public
- Counting New Beans- focusing on quantifying the private art experience
By Devon V. Smith
Edited by Clayton Lord
Commissioned by Theatre Bay Area with funds from the Wallace Foundation, Grants for the Arts, the San Francisco Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Koret Foundation
207 nonprofit organizationsMulti-genreMulti-budgetGeographically diverseVarying levels of social media expertise
Attempting to lay out a baseline for social media engagement by arts organizations, and to highlight bright spots and best practices for the field.
What is it?
On average:
3 social networks66 pieces of content/month162 user responses in return
99% of orgs active on at least 1 social network in study period
Tweet
YouTube
Yelp
Flickr
Blog
Foursquare
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
91%
64%
59%
33%
30%
28%
17%
% of orgs active within study period
Bright spots:
Facebook: Update multiple times/day, custom URL, feature a Welcome tab.Twitter: Update 4x+/day, do not auto-update from Facebook.YouTube: Update 1x+/week.
Twitter Tweets
Flickr Photos Uploaded
Facebook Posts
Blog Posts
YouTube Videos Uploaded
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
24
20
17
4
1
median monthly activity/arts org
Multiple Daily Daily Weekly Monthly0
5001,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,500
average FB likes by update frequency
Multiple Daily Daily Weekly Monthly0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
average FB comments/post by update frequency
4x+/day 2-4x/day Every other day-2x/day Less than every other day 00
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
average Twitter followers by update frequency
4x+/day 2-4x/day Every other day-2x/day Less than every other day 005
101520253035404550
average @ mentions by update frequency
Arts organizations blogging on a self-hosted platform 2x/week or more have more subscribers and comments/post than otherwise.
Posts Subscribers Comments0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
value of a self-hosted blog
Self-hosted Blogspot/Wordpress
By Alan Brown and Rebecca Ratzin
Commissioned by the San Francisco Foundation, Grants for the Arts and the Wallace Foundation
“This report takes stock of a growing body of practice in the arts sector referred to as ‘audience engagement’.”
Attempts to understand and refine the wide array of “engagement” programs into an “Arc of Engagement” to understand the audience’s experience over time.
What is it?
Audience engagement: “a guiding philosophy in the creation and delivery of arts experiences in which the paramount concern is maximizing the impact on the participant.”
The Arc of Engagement: “a five-stage process through which audiences pass, including build-up and contextualization, the artistic exchange, post-processing and extended impact echo.”
6 Audience Typologies with respect to Engagement
- Readers- Critical Reviewers- Casual Talkers- Technology-based Processors- Insight Seekers- Active Learners
By Alan Brown and Jennifer Novak-Leonard, in partnership with Shelly Glibride
Commissioned by the James Irvine Foundation
“This report aims to illuminate a growing body of practice around participatory engagement and dispel some of the anxiety surrounding this sphere of activity.”
Written in conjunction/to support the Irvine Foundation’s new granting strategy, which highly favors “participatory arts practice.”
What is it?
Participatory Arts Practice: “various forms of arts participation in which people play an expressive role.”
Arts Engagement: “the entire spectrum of ways that people can be involved in the arts.”
“General population studies of arts participation consistentlyfind that active participants are more likely to be audiencemembers in the conventional sense.”
Variations on participatory art programs:
-Audience-based programs- main focus on consumption of an artistic product
- Participant-based programs- main focus on the process of artistic creation
Intended goals/outcomes of participatory arts programs:- In Service of Community Need
- Programs designed around specific goals of social justic, activism or giving voice to the disenfranchised.
- In Support of Artistic Vision- Mission-driven but not connected to core programming. Usually
the process of participating is more important than the artistic outcome.
- In Service of Artistic Process/Product- Audiences are allowed to co-create or actually create art.
- As the Fundamental Goal- Participation is paramount, product is secondary.
Year-long investigation into what arguments for public support of the arts work and what arguments don’t.
Posits that the best messaging around the arts are that a thriving arts sector creates “ripple effects” of benefits throughout the community.
What is it?
Produced by the Topos Partnership
Commissioned by Fine Arts Fund (now ArtsWave) with funds from Carol Ann and Ralph V. Haile Jr./US Bank Foundation and the Greater Cincinnati Foundation.
“Public responsibility for the arts is undermined by deeply entrenched perceptions that have nothing to do with government and everything to do with understanding of the arts.”
Assumptions of the public that work against the objective of positioning the arts as a public good:
-The arts are a private matter- The arts are a good to be purchased- People expect to be passive, not active- The arts are a low priority
Objective: to create a “sense of broadly shared responsibility for the arts” in the community.
The “Ripple Effect”- Useful in highlighting the “vibrant, thriving economy” that comes from artistic investment- Showcases the more “connected population” that emerges from shared arts experiences
1) Surveying the landscape
- The arts as entertainment- The arts as personal expression- The arts as beauty- The arts as a school subject
2) Which lead to these consequences:
- The arts are a private matter- The arts are a good to be purchased- The arts are passive, not active- The arts are a low priority
3) Changing the landscape(moving from problematic understandings to constructive ones)
- The arts exhibit community beliefs- The arts are a public concern- The arts are necessary- The arts are everywhere- Arts opportunities are active and clear- The arts are emotional and practical
“The arts create ripple effects of benefits throughout our community.”
Approaches that Missed the Mark with Focus Groups
- Civic inspiration (great civilizations always have art)- Great cities (great cities always invest in art)- Health/science (science says art makes you healthier)- Broadening our horizons (art’s benefits are unique)- Human universal (art has always been a basic need)- City planning (cities need art to prosper)- Innovation (art inspires creativity and innovation)- Works of beauty (human spirit needs beauty)- Transcendence (takes us away from the everyday)- Kids (art engenders empathy and problem-solving)- House/Home (art turns a “house” into a “home”)
“Measuring the Intrinsic Impact of Live Theatre”
By Alan Brown and Rebecca Ratzkin
Edited by Clayton Lord
Commissioned by Theatre Bay Area with funds from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, the NEA, the Mellon Foundation, the Pew Center for Arts & Heritage, Theatre Development Fund, Arts Midwest, San Francisco Arts Commission, City of San Jose and others
58 productions18 theatres6 cities60,000 surveys out19,000 surveys back
Attempting to measure the intellectual, emotional, social, and empathetic impact of art on an individual using standard metrics and a common vocabulary.
What is it?
Book: http://www.theatrebayarea.org/intrinsicimpact
WolfBrown research report: http://www.intrinsicimpact.org
Contact:[email protected]
Where is it?
High response rates (45% on average) suggest theatre patrons are aching to give meaningful feedback.
25% of people said they did anything to “prepare.”
But 30-40% said they read a preview or review.
Major form of preparation: Wikipedia.
35% of people said they left with unanswered questions.
98% of those people actually wrote down their questions.
Anticipation (“How
much were you looking forward
to this performance?”)
Captivation (“How
absorbed were you…?”)
Summative
Impact (“Future
Impression” Indicator)
Correlation=.34; R
Square=.16
Correlation=.70; R Square=.48
Loyalty
(Likelihood to
Recommend)
Correlation = .52; R Square = .28
Familiarity, Preparation, and Feeling
Welcome
R Square = .13
Correlation = .40; R Square = .16
Post-Performa
nce Engagem
ent
Correlation=.39;
R Square=.1
5
Repeat Attendan
ce?
Impl
ied
Rel
atio
nshi
p
Start Here
Causal model of impact
Thank you!
