NEW!!! Link to Keynotes pages.
Go from HERE or look at links on the right
many players many parts
conference
Conference Notes are now posted in the archive section to the right.
Please leave comments.
If you have suggestions etc. you can email me: pwatt@museum.vic.gov.au
LEAVE COMMENTS
posted by STAV TEST @ 7:19 AM
4 Comments:
At 7:17 PM,
STAV TEST said…
Hi everyone,
Here are the web sites for the three conferences(forums) we organized in 2002, 2003, and 2005. By the way, you will notice that in the first two we used the term Forum rather than Conference because we saw them as a coming together of practitioners, those in institutions responsible for performance and artists who work with museums to discuss, share and develop their practice. While of interest to the general public they where mainly promoted within the museum sector. So I am not surprised by the comment that was made that someone had not heard about them! Especially if they had not been working in the sector.
Congratulations to the “Melbourne Mob” for a great and thought provoking conference. Cheers Gordon
2002 Raising the Curtain: First National Forum on Performance in Cultural Institutions 28 February - 2 March 2002
http://www.nma.gov.au/events/past_events/2002_raising_the_curtain/
2003 Spotlight on Performance: Second National Forum on Performance in Cultural Institutions 23 - 25 October 2003 http://www.nma.gov.au/events/past_events/2003_spotlight_on_performance/
2005 Extending Our Reach :The fourth biennial International Museum Theatre Alliance (IMTAL) Conference on Performance in Cultural Institutions. Connecting, Exploring, Provoking 13 - 16 October 2005
http://www.nma.gov.au/events/major_events/2005_imtal_conference/
Gordon Beattie
Arrow Solutions
Making things happen by design
g.beattie@arrowslutions.com.au
At 5:12 AM,
STAV TEST said…
Hi everyone,
Thanks Gordon for passing on the details of previous gatherings. One of the most satisfying and exciting things about MPMP was feeling such a supportive and dynamic "vibe" and sensing the growing strength of the network. Congratulations and thanks to everyone.
We should work to capitalise on this, and you will all be pleased to know that the call for papers for the 5th Biennial International Museum Theatre Alliance Conference (Belfast 2007) has opened. Go to www.imtal-europe.org for more details.
Robert Forshaw (Chair, IMTAL Europe) and his colleagues are looking forward to challenging interpretive theatre practitioners to answer some "big" questions, like what is the point of museum theatre and what's next. It should be a cracking conference, so check out the website, put on your thinking caps and get ready to have fun pushing the envelope.
Cheers
Chris KP
CSIRO
Chris.Krishna-Pillay@csiro.au
At 6:55 PM,
STAV TEST said…
Notes on Day from Tiki Swain
Many Players Many Parts conference
Tiki’s report from day 3 (Saturday)
The sessions I attended included
• a keynote by Tony Jackson of the Centre for Applied Theatre Research in Manchester,
• an opening on Science to Music by Chris Krishna-Pillay from CSIROSec,
• an explanation of designing a venue around performance from the Melbourne Zoo,
• a discussion by the State Library, Museum Victoria and the Australian National Maritime Museum on travelling displays and taking performances to external venues,
• a performance by Narrabundah College students that was linked to the Exiles and Emigrants exhibition and organised by the National Museum,
• and a brief display of Robots Inc footage from SMART outreach at the University of Newcastle.
Key points are as follows
Keynote speaker – Tony Jackson, Centre for Applied Theatre Research
His talk focused around the question of what does dramatic performance bring to an exhibition – does it enhance or not? Some pertinent questions, which seemed to come down to the idea of an “empathy paradox”: that while a dramatic performance can create a sense of connection and empathy for a character and their experiences, it also narrows down the understanding a visitor gains of a situation to just those experiences and that character. A visitor who explores an exhibition on their own is more likely to gain a greater sense of the big picture and how all the factors relate. They may also appreciate more what they’ve found out, because they were in control of it and did it themselves.
This later triggered a discussion on making meaning and the relevance of drama – in which I personally come down on the side that the visitor is making their own meaning from their experience, we don’t actually have nearly as much control over what they think as we think we do. But in science presenting this is less of an issue regardless. It does suggest that for our factual and objective science messages that using characters is not going to be a terribly successful way of creating engagement (though it might create more effective remembering of key messages).
One quote: “just because it’s an experience doesn’t mean it’s educational”.
His comment about the interaction between audience and performance space in a museum was also interesting – that it’s typical to have a few people in the audience who contract in immediately and for the whole thing, who come sit down up the front and stay. Then you have a group who hang back around the edges, who want control over where they stand, how involved they get, and whether or not they come and go – they choose when they’ll contract in to the performance. Then you have a third group, who just stick their noses in as they’re going by and wander off again once they’ve seen what it is.
Science to Music – Chris Krishna-Pillay, CSIROSec
Chris simply did an entertaining performance to a piece of soundtrack music, in which he told us the list of speccy science tricks he’d do, and then did them. No explanations whatsoever, it was more about performance and style than the science. And plenty of style, too. The slow motion juggling seems like something we might be able to use somewhere.
The Elephant Trail – Scott Killeen and Nadya Tkachenko, Melbourne Zoo
The elephant exhibit was designed as an immersive experience, to create the impression of being in South East Asia where the elephants live and to bring forward the issues that arise from people living with animals. The design and layout deliberately included several spaces suitable for performance. Performance was intended as integral from the outset. While many of the messages are physically embedded in the exhibits and setting, they intended from the start some of the messages would be provided only through interpretation. Their LEOS provide this interpretation by taking on characters – formerly only that of a research scientist studying elephants (and getting excited by poo!), but they are now introducing new characters to meet other visitor and staff needs. They found that many visitors were not entirely willing to suspend disbelief and pretend they were in the South East Asian forest with a research scientist, and would ask questions about the zoo instead. The also found that the LEOs just doing the same script all the time got bored with it. So they are introducing a “zoo staff member” character who will interpret things that the keepers are doing with the elephants and talk about keeping elephants in a zoo, and also a “tour guide” character who can provide messages about the elephants being positive for the local economy of the village and about the village’s everyday human-animal interactions.
Museum in a Bottle – discussions by the Sydney Maritime Museum, the State Library of Victoria and Museum Victoria
The Sydney Maritime Museum focuses on storytelling techniques with their shows, with very limited sets and a lot of imagination. This is partly because of the nature of their spaces – they have little room for performance on the floor, and no spaces custom-designed for it. So they work on the principles that the actor is the bottle for their ship, and that the hook that shuts out the rest of the world is emotion. These shows then can be taken other places such as the local children’s hospital, where again the show is run with a minimum of props and a lot of imagination.
The State Library takes some of its rare books and manuscripts out to regional areas four times a year. They visit perhaps three or four towns, going to the schools and doing public showings. Oddly, the librarians can become minor celebrities while they’re on tour, which I imagine is an unusual experience for them. For them, the logistics of security and packing are the biggest hassle as they are likely to be travelling with a million dollars worth of books. They report that in all the tours they’ve had only one child touch a book – simply because he was so excited, not out of mischief. They use no pre- or post- materials, but they do speak with all the teachers on the phone beforehand and talk them through ways they can make the most of the visit.
Museum Victoria uses postable boxes that are packed as complete kits to mail things out to schools. They also tend to try and take the *entire* show rather than a limited-set version if they’re visiting an external venue.
Exiles and Emigrants – performance
The students performed this very simply – using a Powerpoint-esque projected background that showed relevant images from the exhibition the performance was created for, no costume (all in stage blacks), using their bodies, movement and spacing to create the effects of a set. There were approximately twelve of them. The text came from historical letters from emigrants that the students had researched - hearing the stories in the words of the people who’d made them. Strong impact. And creating the piece was an educational experience for the students, too.
Key comment from discussion on this by Lyn Beasley of the National Museum of Australia, who helped organise and set this performance up to happen: that school students can deliver a high standard product that looks quite professional, if the museum is flexible in allowing access and support and time. She felt having the high standard product was essential, and had had initial concerns as to if a student group could produce a piece of sufficient standard. The piece had added to their exhibition in several ways including creating familiarity with the artworks and images so that students recognised paintings that they’d just seen in the show and went over to look at them and talk about them further.
Robots Inc, presented by SMART at University of Newcastle
SMART stands for Science MAths Real Technology – it’s an outreach program run by the University of Newcastle.
The key thing I learnt from this audiovisual presentation was that watching four-legged and two-legged robots run around over uneven ground is hysterically funny for the entire audience. It’s kind of like watching a coffee table tapdance in big fluffy legwarmers. If we could get some of that footage it’d be a great inclusion in a robotics show.
At 7:32 PM,
STAV TEST said…
Keynote Address by Rose Hiscock
Posted by Patrick Watt
I’VE GOT YOU UNDER MY SKIN
This may be a controversial statement at a performance conference but with the exception of the performing arts, performance is often considered a secondary aspect in Cultural Institutions. Particularly large ones. Attention and marketing campaigns tend to centre around the big exhibitions. So I’d like to “out” performance and unpack what it can do from a marketers perspective. I’d also like to follow the thread of Wesley’s presentation yesterday talking particularly about community, engagement and identity.
Coming back to Sovereign Hill makes me feel nostalgic. This is a slide of my sister aged 6 visiting Sovereign Hill, circa 1974. How many people have a similar photo at home, or one of you at a museum, a puppet show or a pantomime? How do those images make you feel? I’d like to draw your attention to the title of my paper - I’ve got you under my skin, because this presentation is about love.
So let’s get loved up.
As cultural institutions our business, is as good as our audience. To be successful we need to know how to reach audiences and how to engage them.
I don’t want to run down my profession but reaching audiences is the easy part. The rise of advertising or propaganda is largely credited to the first Roman Emperor Augustus who was born in 63 BC – 14 AD. He was emperor at the time Pompeii was in its hey day.
This is propaganda on a wall in Pompeii. It refers to a baker who was running for parliament. His campaign was basically: vote for me and I’ll give you bread. This particular propaganda is from a brothel owner Asellina promising her vote to the baker. (I’m not sure what else she promised as the baker asked her to remove the sign) In my view the baker’s campaign is fabulous, vote for me and I’ll give you bread. It is up front and to the point. We are about to head into an election in Victoria, and I wonder hat kind of promises we will given. But more on promises later.
So working out what to say is relatively easy (as long as you are straight forward.) Reaching people is easy as well. Walls
Are still used for propaganda but we have an extraordinary range of media choices now. Although changing quickly, Australia is an easier media environment to work in than other countries around the world.
We have fewer media outlets and they are relatively affordable. Museum Victoria is running an advertisement on the front of the Melbourne Age. It costs $12 000, It would cost $36 000 on the front of the Daily Telegraph, and inside the NY Times $44 000. So as you can see by comparison Australian advertising rates are cheap, based on what we know about audiences, we can make pretty good assessments about how many people we can reach.
Filtered by people with tertiary qualifications bracket
• 60% of males and 57 % of females aged 18-39 are medium to heavy readers
• 63% of Females and 70% of males aged 40-59 are medium to heavy newspaper readers (3-7 per week), and in the.
Added to affordable advertising rates the rise of electronic marketing is seeing the rise of very low cost marketing through databases and on line subscriptions.
There is a reason however why media in Australia is cheap- rates are distribution based and Australia’s population is small: Australia’s population is 21 million. In comparison the population of France is 63 million, United Kingdom 61 million, USA 299 million.
Added to this Australia receives just 5 million tourists a year, in comparison France receives 76 million, USA 45 million. UK 22 million.
In Australia, and many regional cities around the world, there are simply less bums to go on seats.
Added to this
• 13.3% of the Australian population were born in non-English speaking countries;
• 16.7% of Victorians were born in non-English speaking countries, representing nearly 800,000 Victorians;
• 36.4% of Victorians have a least one parent born in non-English speaking country;
• less than 49% of all Victorian residents can claim all four grandparents being born in English speaking countries.
Australia’s communities are diverse and this ads an element of complexity.
For Cultural institutions to survive in Australia they must build loyal local audiences. With such a diverse population we must build trust. And this means learning how to engage audiences in a way that gets them talking, wanting more and coming back for more. We need to consider audiences as our most powerful marketers.
So how do you engage audiences? And how do you convert them to promote you.
I was in Europe in July this year presenting at a conference called Communicating the Museum. I took the opportunity to visit a number of cultural institutions. Knowing that I was presenting at this conference I was looking out for performance and programming. But public programming in large institutions was hard to find. I found busy museums and of course stunning exhibitions, objects, and collections. But I was surprised at the lack of human – human action.
With the exception of the National Museum of Australia, each Australian institution draws well over 50% of its audience for its local area. In comparison this figure is 30% for the large institutions in Britain and US. The National Museums of Liverpool is perhaps a closer match.
With such high populations and tourist numbers large institutions can perhaps rely on a new pool of audiences for their markets.
They are however interested in loyalty -most organizations large and small are putting considerable energies into building databases, loyalty and membership programs. The Tate Modern has an entire floor that only members can access and employs someone to walk the queue to subscribe people to the program
So loyalty clearly matters. Exclusivity such as membership programs is one way of achieving loyalty however it does not deal with the masses.
I have suggested that performance is often considered secondary aspect in Cultural Institutions. An exhibition may draw people in and the performance keeps them happy. This of course does not need to be the case - performance can lead visits - however I am interested in the role of performance where it has been traditionally considered second fiddle. Because in a small town, keeping people happy is in fact the main game-
People come to the grand final to see the footy, not the pre-show entertainment. But what if there was no pre-show? No second rate clapped out performer crackling through the national anthem to football players fudging the words? Or what if Melbourne Cup day was just about racing? No fashions on the field and boozed-up shoeless fillies dressed in handkerchiefs and hats running for a train. Most large events- particularly sporting have recognised the power of performance as an important ingredient in satisfying audiences. The Melbourne 2006 Commonwealth Games was a great example of a perceived secondary element - the cultural Festival, having higher attendance than the sporting events. At Museum Victoria the language we use is delight and attractor, or base an signature programs to describe the role of performance.
So what is it then, that performance can do, what is its role in building loyalty?
To answer this question we need to get into the minds of our audiences. And to do this I’d like to share with you the results of a Museum Victoria market research project.
Melbourne Museum opened in 2000. It had a high attendance projections, a high admission charge and suffered the fate of many new venues after the first year visitation dropped. Compounding this problem, budgets were set on unrealistic projections and the museum was spending beyond its means. Analysing the data, we found one audience segment significantly below its target - the local metropolitan Melbourne market. A significant issue, given the reliance on local audience. To determine the problem, the Museum conducted barrier and driver research. This qualitative research aimed to find what was stopping people from visiting and what would motivate them. The research found three key problems- product, price and promotion (that’s pretty much everything that could go wrong) I’ll deal first with price. In 2003 the Victorian Government provided funding to enable MV to reduce prices across all of its museums. This has had a different impact at each of our venues. SW noticed little increase in visitors and MM about 17% increase. Whilst price points can be blamed for problems I believe that if the product delivers, price is usually not a significant issue. Interactive museums tend to be less price sensitive as they offer clear value for money. I suspect that the Sovereign Hill entry price is not a barrier, instead it is the additional charges such as petrol and food along the way.
The problems with both promotion and product pointed to a lack of engagement.
The research found that for people who had not yet visited, Melbourne Museum had not carved out a strong position or brand essence in the market place and consumers were therefore falling back to traditional views of museums as:
Historic, archival, stuffy, boring, traditional, staid, not for them
The museum lacked , a sense of urgency, perceived suitability. It was perceived as time consuming, daunting, regimented, expensive and potentially short (value for money), not social.
So what was the experience for visitors, Melbourne Museum was an enjoyable experience BUT lacked stand out features. This caused two problems for growing loyalty-
1. There was no real take away attribute And importantly
2. It did not create discussion after the event
It was described by our researcher as: A facade without a soul
Contrasting this attitude were people's spontaneous responses to Scienceworks which they spoke of with passion and a sense of ownership. This is due to the highly interactive nature of SW where our research shows that audiences don’t differentiate between staff or object, it is all part of the experience.
Melbourne Museum's challenge in reaching audiences and converting visits comes down to Engagement. And this would apply to any cultural institution.
An engagement is an intention to be married. To be engaged you are in a relationship. For Cultural institutions to achieve sustained success, particularly in small markets, they need to form lasting and beautiful relationships with their visitors. So what is the best way to engage with another person? The most effective way is through person to person contact and this is where the love comes in.
The MV research revealed four audience segments each inspired by different motivational characteristics. The axis represent stimulate and absorb, for me and for others.
The interesting thing about these segments is that people are not placed definitively in one or other segment- they may move between them based on your needs at the time. For example I may have an inspirer reaction to one exhibition and emotional, duty bound reaction to another. I’m clearly having a nostalgic and emotional reaction to being back at Sovereign Hill. This is a relationship.
The emotional segment is one of the most interesting to work with. Most likely to be visiting with children and looking for an emotional connection. Personalising an experience can make an enormous difference to this segment. Performance can do this is a very direct way. It is immediate and personable. It is emotional. And that is what makes a difference.
Last year Museum Victoria conducted similar barrier and driver research to identify the perceived gaps in the Immigration Museum experience. A range of exhibitions were analysed with interesting results. We asked respondents what they expected from a visit to the Immigration Museum and found that the experience over-delivered. We then asked what should we do to improve- expecting them to focus on developing new exhibitions.
They basically said- forget exhibitions, it will be more of the same. To capture our interest and create urgency you need to do something different. And each group suggested to use performance to bring the museum to life.
Of the four museum segments, the Immigration Museum appeals most to the Duty Bound. This is the group looking for an emotional connection. Of course we use programming heavily within the Immigration Museum. However to turn the organization from an exhibition lead approach to a performance lead approach, is an interesting challenge and one that would require significant cultural change. We are not there yet but it is a clear message if we wish to follow.
The power of performance is the ability to create urgency and personal connection, but also to get people talking. In a small market where return visitation is vital…this should not be underestimated. In 2002 MM staged a performance rather than a touring exhibition in its touring hall. Our visitor research demonstrated that the show inspired 66% of visitors to come to the Museum 60% were new visitors and 86% said they’d come back to see a similar show in the future. Word of Mouth prompted 20% of visits. Compared with 8% Word of mouth prompt to visit for a dinosaur exhibition and 11% for Mummies.
Word of mouth is the most powerful marketing tool available. And with the exponential rise of electronic marketing it has extended into a whole new world- Word of Mouse.
Most cultural institutions have some areas with unrestricted photography policies. This combined with 3D objects and best still people provides a fabulous backdrop for photography. Whether captured on mobile phones or cameras, digital photography is a powerful and immediate way to enable word of mouse. This is the T-Rex room at the Natural History Museum London. The room was not created with photography in mind, however has become a non stop flash affair with parents propping children on railings to click the moment, before T-Rex snaps their heads off.
It is not unusual for people to photograph their love ones. However our opportunity, and a competitive advantage over many attractions such as Zoos is to shape this moment so that our venue and messages are clearly identified and audiences become an army of marketers. Why not stage or build these opportunities into performances. Find the show stopper moment and literally stop the show to ask people to take a photo. Sovereign Hill have been on to this concept for a while although I’m not sure if it has moved digital yet.
So performance is a great tool to reach and engage audiences. But I’d like to go a step further to show what this means for a healthy brand.
So to start with what is this thing called brand? A brand is described as many things - most often a promise, The baker in Pompeii’s promise is clear and you get a sense of what he stands for. But there are more sophisticated definitions of brands - words like personality, image or identity. The main thing is that it includes the perceptions that someone may have around a product or service. These perceptions may be shaped by personal experience, but also advertising, PR, spin, hype, word of mouth or any other range of influences. So a brand is not just a logo, or a building or a venue. It is an all encompassing concept and includes the total audience experience.
The concept is powerful because it centres on the audience not the product. Take Sovereign Hill. It’s a large complex- some 26 hectares. But it is the audience that brings it to life, day or night. So, what’s their experience? Who do they meet, what do they find out? What do they leave with? Who do they leave with? Did anyone read an article in the syndicated weekend papers a few weeks ago (September 17 ). Titled Wooing to win: Would you date these men?, The article states “whatever happened to romance? While French champagne and roses are as winning as ever, the real tools of seduction are honesty and imagination, say five men who know how to make the ladies swoon” The article went on to describe one of the men who is a well known Sydney Advertising agency guru, and his account of “the most extravagant encounter he ever created, guaranteed to make even the most resistant women swoon” The article states: “ I once had a girl picked up in a limousine -the back seat was covered in petals- and taken to a warf where there was a table for two with Mc Donald’s and champagne, he recalls proudly. About 20 minutes later, a yacht arrived with crew and the real dinner began. It was cooked on board as we sailed around the harbour”. This man lives and breaths brands and from this one date you get a very clear understanding of his personality/promise or identity (I just hope the woman did not pig out on the Mc Donalds and left a little room)
There is however another definition of a brand and one that I think is more powerful and relevant to our world: a brand is a relationship. Professor of Brand Marketing and Director for Research in the Brand Marketing Department at the Birmingham University Business school has the following to say about Brands as relationships.
“Relationships are purposive and enable both parties to provide meanings. Customers choose brands in part because they seek to understand themselves and to communicate aspects of their selves to others. Through engaging in a relationship, albeit briefly, customers are able to resolve ideas about their self….”
In my view this is useful definition of a brand because it is not about spin and promise. It goes deeper to touch on engagement and visitors making their own judgement based on experience. And it is something that our sector can own- where commercial operators can only promise, we can develop relationships that are based on the product itself rather than a promotional gimmick.
To articulate our brand, Museum Victoria has developed a number of brand values. They govern what we do how we want our visitors to think about us. Over time we will test them to check in on our brand health. We are just starting this work but over time these values should govern all that we do including recruitment of staff as well as exhibointions and public programs. If we are consistent it will help our audiences feel trust, and ownership in the same way that they currently do with SW.
Our overall aim is to build our profile and in so doing build the profile of our sector.
I believe that cultural institutions need to wise up to loyalty. We need more than an just an offer – we need an ongoing relationship with our audience. One of the themes for this conference is partnerships. The most important partnership we have is with our audience. Like any relationship it needs nurturing and love. And performance has the ability to provide the personal connection and emotional link required for love.
But before this can happen we need to address a concept that Wesley introduced yesterday- value. How do we value artists, in a politically conservative climate where funding is being reduced for small companies. And how do we value performance in a large organizations where the dominant culture is centered in other disciplines?
I have the privilege to Chair of Back to Back Theatre Company. It is a small professional theatre company creatively driven by a full-time ensemble of actors with intellectual disabilities – the company is known for its unconventional, idiosyncratic, challenging, often comic but always humanistic work. The company’s recent work SMO sold out at the 2005 Melbourne International Festival and will travel nationally and internationally next year
Last year the company won the 2005 Sydney Myer performing arts awards
I’d like o quote from the judges citation:
“Back to Back has drawn upon the intelligence, craft and creativity of its actors and other artistic collaborators to create some forty original works in theatre, film and community projects.
With … superb dramaturgy, … sound technology permitted small metal objects to play in the potentially anarchic space of the Flinders Street Station Concourse, where police, railway and security officers, passengers, drifters, baristas and the actors mingled in random moves before the perplexed audience sitting in tiered rows on one side. The combination of plotted action, improvisation and unpredictability in a public space created endless frissons for actors and audiences alike, creating a rare bond that will be hard to forget by anyone privileged to see this exceptional work.”
I have two observations to make here regarding small metal objects -
The show was about value, and the perceived value of a person with a disability. Conceived and acted by people with disabilities, the work challenged what it means to be normal, and our perception of value.
Back to back is a Theatre company with an Artistic Director General Manager, part time administration and 5 actors. Every board meeting I am humbled by the work that this extraordinary team deliver and I can’t help comparing this to larger well resourced organisations. As seen over the past few days it’s a sure fire way to rip through the crap and make a lasting connection with people.
So for me it’s a question of value. Do we value the role of performance within our spaces? are we encouraging it to live and breath for itself, are we prepared to be gutsy with it and have it drive rather than be recessive? And do we value its role as a providing the love?
So where from here? I have discussed something today that is intangible- if our audiences at SW can’t differentiate between the experiences on offer- from staff to exhibitions, how can we measure it? I don’t know the answer to this but I do think the future for venues in is relationships and we need to spend time and attention learning how to love up our audiences as much as we can.
.
Post a Comment
<< Home