A presentation for the National Arts Marketing Conference 2009 in Providence, RI given by Tamsen McMahon of Sametz Blackstone Associates, Kim Noltemy of Sametz Blackstone Associates, and Davie Dalena of the Celebrity Series of Boston. A exploration of how branding can be used to command the cultural marketplace.
Is not about your logo, it never was… Brand is the carrier of what you stand for, your: promises, expectations, experiences; capabilities, strengths, attributes; position in the competitive environment. Helps attract and retain, staff, board, donors, partners, artists, and more. Creates value that extends beyond one-off campaigns. Builds resonance and connection that helps keep diverse revenue streams healthy. Is critical to cutting through the din… And ultimately influencing thinking and behavior.
Quant: great for measuring actions, and is often more historical than aspirational Qual: great for uncovering motivations BEHIND actions, which is important for getting to the essence of brand-related decisions, preferences, etc,,, Inside --from vols to staff to board chair External --audiences, donors, prospects all the way to competitive and relevant environment.
Prepare your open book: Active v. Passive transparency
Your brand is like a sound wave that carries far—it will resonate with some and not others (and that’s okay) Social media means, in many ways, the "death of distance" - Tom Peters most powerful (donor) constituency may not be your local one broadcasting to narrowcast to find the the audiences with whom you resonate most strongly
With everyone talking at once, your brand has to be heard above the noise. How? Clarity, like a knife against a wine glass—it can be heard throughout the room, and carries a clear message (stop, listen) clarity - irreducible core short and shareable words don't make you better, work does (show v. tell) in other words, despite what a lot of folks are saying right now, you CAN control your brand where control actually happens: in how you "live" your brand
“ logical interconnection”—not just “understandability”
matter where it matters to be moving people closer to you v. moving you closer to them leveraging networks
matter where it matters to be moving people closer to you v. moving you closer to them leveraging networks
With your eyes and ears open, it’s time to start digging deeper to see what’s there and what you have to work with. Investigation covers: Audiences Resonance and Dissonance Content Outcomes and Measurement
David
David • The organization often approached communications from a tactical perspective: promoting the season, performer, or program. Communications have met little success in advancing awareness of the organization as a whole. • Because of this tactical focus—reinforced by communications that connect to either specific tasks or to the internal organizational structure—there is not a clear image “out there” of who Celebrity Series is, or what it promises, or why it’s an organization worthy of support. • Dis-integrated communications have promoted a diffuse image. While pieces, individually, were often well-executed, the lack of connection among communication efforts—within and across areas and media—did little to build a robust, recognizable brand. • “ Named” programs and services have not been adequately connected to FleetBoston Celebrity Series—so that recognition of both the good work and heft of the organization has often leaked away. • Multiple name changes have exacerbated the problem of building recognition and have also subordinated the Celebrity Series to more powerful brands—Boston University, The Wang Center, and most recently FleetBoston Financial, to name a few. • Misconceptions often hold the place of accurate ones: the organization, which was incorporated as a not-for-profit entity in 1989, is still, by many, perceived to be a for-profit organization—and often thought of as an arm of FleetBoston Financial. • New audiences need to be developed—to create a larger development base, foster diversity, and to generate more loyal ticket-buyers who can spread the word more effectively than can any mail or phone campaign—while core audiences need to be nurtured and retained. • Celebrity Series also faces steep brand competition from within its own offerings—competing with the brands of the venues in which it presents, the brands of the performers on stage, the brands of the title sponsor, and the brands of co-sponsors. (When presenting Ailey Week in The Wang Theatre, sponsored by Tufts Health Plan, FleetBoston Celebrity Series ended up as low man on the brand totem pole.) • Not having a “home”—a building with a sign over the door—also makes it harder for FleetBoston Celebrity Series to occupy a recognizable place in the cultural landscape. • Even internally, there hasn’t been clarity around how to describe the organization, what it does, for whom, and why different constituencies should care. Messages, like the design of materials, have been more connected to internal organizational structure and departmental goals than to a higher-level institutional brand—or to constituencies. • And culturally, some shifts are needed—“silos” need to have bridges built to connect them; horizontal functions—such as marketing / sales / development / pr—need to present an integrated face to the world based on shared thinking, strategies, goals, and “the story.” • Operationally, the logo and logotype were neither as legible nor as recognizable as needed—especially in environments where the symbols of the Celebrity Series had to compete with marks that were both better known and graphically stronger. • Good planning dictates that Celebrity Series needs to continue to build on its fiscal stability—to be able to expand into new areas, to take more risks in programming (and maybe reach a wider demographic) and to be prepared to “go it alone” without a title, brand-connected sponsor, should that happen for one reason or another.
David
Roger
David Unaided awareness was low: <2.5% know the name Unaided awareness trailed that of other arts organizations Those who recalled the name could not characterize the brand Only 6.5% recalled advertising 67% thought Celebrity Series is part of Fleet bank Subsidiary programs were not associated with Celebrity Series Audience was mostly white, highly educated, and wealthy; 63.5% live with children
David Unaided awareness was low: <2.5% know the name Unaided awareness trailed that of other arts organizations Those who recalled the name could not characterize the brand Only 6.5% recalled advertising 67% thought Celebrity Series is part of Fleet bank Subsidiary programs were not associated with Celebrity Series Audience was mostly white, highly educated, and wealthy; 63.5% live with children
Roger Building upon the earlier quantitative research, in 2002 Sametz Blackstone interviewed 17 people (staff, executives, board members) to “get calibrated” and to better understand what issues could be addressed though new branding / communication initiatives. There was significant uniformity around the issues, challenges, hurdles and opportunities. The most noted comments include: • Low awareness / low comprehension / a story that is hard to tell: no two people describe Celebrity Series, and its mission and programs, the same way—so there is no coherent brand identity “out there.” • Historical impediments: the history of name changes has hindered building awareness. • Lacking a highly visible, branded venue, Celebrity Series’ role in bringing artists to Boston is often subordinated to those of the host venues and program sponsors with well-known brands. This suggests the need for Celebrity Series to find novel ways to associate its name with its constituents’ experiences. • Even within Celebrity Series, persons from different departments, facing very different day to day challenges, have sometimes divergent perspectives on the meaning Celebrity Series has to the Boston cultural community. • Consequent to the divergent perspectives and responsibilities among departments, communications issuing from each department had little resemblance to one another, lacking a unified approach to presenting the master brand. Marketing and promotion budgets, also allocated to departments but not the overall brand, further reinforce the problem. • Unclear focus: is Celebrity Series about presenting performing arts, or about something more inclusive of educational efforts? Is it all about the star performers or is it a more robust cultural asset? • The difficulty of presenting the presenter: customers are buying tickets to see a performer (who usually has his / her own “brand” recognition). They are seated in “brand-named” halls like the Wang Center or Symphony Hall. Donors give money for the dance program or for youth outreach. The organization’s name is practically synonymous with the region’s largest bank. “FleetBoston Celebrity Series” takes a back seat in most minds. • Growth, fiscal stability, and risk-taking: Who supports Celebrity Series, who doesn’t, and why? With a relatively small base for annual giving and a perceived dependence on title sponsorship, Celebrity Series is often limited in its freedom to take creative programming risks.
Roger
Roger
Roger
Roger
The institutional positioning statement defines Celebrity Series’ place among its competition—the competition for time and attention, and for entertainment and philanthropic dollars.