In order to improve my sales skills, in the spring and summer of 2010, I reviewed quite a few books on how to be a better salesperson.
Every book I looked at made a claim like this one: as a salesperson, you aren’t selling an apple, a smart phone, or a play. You’re selling a solution to a problem. To sell well, first, figure out a person’s problem by asking a lot of questions and by listening carefully. Then, convince her that your product is the solution to her problem. In many instances, you may even need to convince the person the problem exists, before you get a chance to sell the solution. The best salespersons identify genuine problems and offer genuine solutions.
With that as background, here then are two questions for you, if you have a few minutes to reply:
1. Which of the arts do you most often consume and what problem does it solve for you?
2. Who convinces you to buy your preferred art?
All thoughts greatly appreciated!
rpriske
December 14, 2010
Looking at advertising as problem solving buys into the warped reality created by advertising in the first place.
The statement that sometimes the consumer has to be convinced they have a problem still assumes that the problem exists in the first place.
What I was taught in the marketing portion of my Commerce degree is that advertising creates WANTS and then turns WANTS into NEEDS.
I am convinced the only way you can even have this conversation is if you don’t actually understand what a WANT or a NEED really is. They are not what advertising wants to claim they are.
Sterling Lynch
December 14, 2010
Rusty, thanks for your comment. My response should help me clarify the question I’m asking.
First, I should clarify my terms.
“Selling” does not equal “advertising”, although advertising can be an important dimension of a successful marketing and sales campaign. When I ask someone to pay for my show or purchase my art, or even to pay attention to me for free, I’m selling — whether I do that with a poster, a website, or a one-on-one conversation. When my friend says, hey, you should see this show, she’s selling on behalf of that show.
So, the question I’m asking: when I/you/we sell the arts, what is being sold? And I figure the best people to ask are the people who are being sold.
Perhaps, my use of the word “problem” muddies the waters. So I will clarify what I mean. A problem can be anything from “How do I meet new people” to “How do I find meaning in an otherwise meaningless life” to “how do I decorate my home in a way that will impress my peers?” to “How do I fill time on a lazy Sunday?”
Finally, I should add we can distinguish between ethical selling and unethical selling. I don’t think we should judge all selling to be evil simply because some sellers have been unethical. For example, I am pretty happy many more people have been sold on the idea of condom use.
rpriske
December 14, 2010
There is nothing wrong with what you asked. You just happened to touch on one of my ‘not-button’ issues that causes me to jerk my kneee.
Sterling Lynch
December 14, 2010
Gotcha!
nadinethornhill
December 14, 2010
I’m going to answer your questions in a separate comment, but I wanted to say something about Rusty’s point.
I have similar issues with concepts of advertising/marketing as problem-solving. I’m not anti-consumerist, nor I am against the idea of want/wish fulfillment. I do have a problem with the notion of distorting wants/desires to the point that they become indistinguishable from needs.
Not to create a separate tangent, but I think the accept trend of living beyond one’s means and mass debt is (in part) the result of people having no ability to distinguish between the two.
Sterling Lynch
December 14, 2010
I guess, I’m far more small-l liberal on this question.
Once we get beyond the necessities of comfortable survival (water, food, shelter, companionship) , I think the question of need vs. want quickly reduces to a definitional argument, where “needs” and “wants” are defined as those things I and my peers regards as wants and needs. For example, I find baffling the notion that owning a home and/or a car (of any size) counts as a “need”, but I also recognize I am in the minority. If people judge home ownership as a “need” and are, for this reason, prepared to work for it, so be it.
And I think this conversation is right on point: does anyone “need” our art? Maybe some people “want” it but don’t “need” it. What “need” or “want” do we serve with it. In terms of selling, it might be useful to distinguish between wants and needs. But, I think, we should let the person to whom we are selling decide what she counts as a want and a need (E.g. I want a funny story but I need daycare).
Sarah Mahoney
December 14, 2010
The arts that I most often ‘consume’ are TV and Movies. I often feel guilty about this as a theatre artist – but that is another matter altogether.
I think that movies at the cinema, fill a desire to get out of the house on a whim, not a planned theatrical event, or gallery showing, but a spur of the moment, I want out of the house – and no pressure on me to interact in any way. There is also the sense, that I have some idea of what I am getting myself into.
TV, is pure entertainment, like chocolate bars, I mostly try to stick to higher quality shows, but I dumpster dive from time to time. Also shows are like friends, who do not place any demands on me. They chat to me – even if it is only one way and make me happy. Even the most depressing and challenging shows like “the wire” are not filled with the same pressure as watching a play.
Theatre and 2 and 3 D art can have a much more profound impact on me, but I feel less of a need to see it. I feel a need to be a part of it’s creation, but if I do not see any of these art forms for weeks on end, I feel little loss. But when I do come across great art again it can really make my heart sing.
Now I am kind of rambling so I had better stop here.
Sterling Lynch
December 14, 2010
Thanks, Sarah, your observations are very valuable. And I think it’s VERY helpful for lovers of the arts to recognize that we also don’t always make the arts a priority and to figure out why.
Here’s my takeaway from what you write. Please correct me if I’m not characterizing it properly.
For you, movies/TV provide: 1) Spontaneous unplanned entertainment; 2) Entertainment without obligation.
In contrast, art promises the chance of a higher quality experience, which isn’t necessarily entertaining, and your need for that experience isn’t as great as, say, enjoying yourself spontaneously with little or no social obligations.
I think these are important observations and highlight some of the hidden costs of “high” art.
Who do you think sells you on TV, movies, or any particular show/movie?
Sarah Mahoney
December 14, 2010
If I am not able to go out to the movies, I start to go stir crazy – I certainly felt this living in Tanzania. To the point that when we make the 4 hour trek to Nairobi we would go to see whatever movie was playing no matter how bad it was. I do not know why but I find something liberating about seeing a movie – weird!?!
Back in a world with more choices, hearing a synopsis that is intriguing or knowing that there are actors or directors whose choices I trust will make me want to see a movie. Contrary to those around me, I really like knowing something about a movie going in, I need to know if I should be expecting a thriller or a romantic comedy or I get stressed out. Movie trailers work well for me, I will often watch some just before choosing a film. Though more and more I will only watch the first 30sec of a trailer and decide based on that, since they are really starting to give the whole movie away.
But, that said I am as likely to see a film because it is on at the right time and feel that the genre will be likable enough for me to enjoy it. Sometimes this means I get really frustrated with what I am watching but mostly my expectations are low enough.
For TV quality is more important, if I watch 3-4 episodes, and feel that the overall quality is not good enough, then I will drop the show. But once I am hooked and friends with the characters it is harder to get rid of me. I like the quality of many of the BBC mini-series but I find it hard to loose my friends after 20 hours or less compared to the longer running North American counterparts.
I am still not sure that I have really answered your question.
I am more trusting of seeing a film than going to the theatre because I feel that more people have vetted the product before it has reached me, so there some sort of quality control. I know that many movies are in cinemas that are horrible, but I feel that I can usually see them a mile off, which is not true in theatre. A play can sound really interesting, and then I can feel completely deceived when I dislike it or it is middle of the road and mediocre.
Also as Nadine mentioned, TV is on my own time, I am not following any schedules, I also watch on the internet or buy DVDs. So there is no effort involved and I also mostly watch it while doing something else.
One last point is that while in Africa, I saw very little theatre or art, but I did not feel like I was missing it. But the more mind blowing fantastical theatre I see, the more I crave it. I wonder if there is some link between that and the lack of youth in theatre audiences?
Sterling Lynch
December 16, 2010
I totally understand what you say about movies being a surer thing. I also think your explanation of why movies are a safer bet is accurate. Because so many movies are made and so many people express an opinion about them, if I exercise any discretion in my decision, I can be almost certain of picking a film I will at minimum enjoy and more often than not be REALLY impressed by. The same can not be said about theatre.
Here is what I read: as a rule, you are sold on a movie by a compelling synopsis, the involvement of trusted artists, and a clear understanding of what you are getting yourself into. On some occasions, you will be swayed by brute convenience, if it is a genre you normally enjoy. When it comes to TV, you are more willing to test run a series. Is it safe to assume you will be sold on testing a particular series for the same reasons you are sold on a film: interesting synopsis and trust.
And yes, you have answered my question. It sounds to me like there are a number of people who sell you on a film: the person who schedules it, the person who put the theatre in a convenient spot, the person who writes the synopsis, the person who designs the trailer, the artists involved, and all the different people who vet and discuss it. The list goes on I’m sure. There’s a whole industry of people selling you on the notion of going to a film/watching TV.
For me, it’s the editor of the Bytowne, some reviewer on Rotten Tomatoes, and Erika. She often sells me on the idea of seeing a movie.
It’s also worth noting that watching movies and TV is a habit you were long ago sold on and your decision is constantly reinforced by society.
And I agree: if kids aren’t exposed to mind-blowing theatre, where “mind-blowing” is defined by them — not parents, educator, etc. — they will not take much of an interest in it. Same goes for adults.
Although I’m tempted to say, that in this day and age it might be hard to hold a child’s attention, I know that’s not true. I witnessed about 2000 kids, from 3 – 17, be transfixed by a dress rehearsal performance of a ballet. When the action had to be halted, for something to be corrected, the kids didn’t lose their focus for one second.
Sarah Mahoney
December 16, 2010
It seems obvious when you mention it, but I had not really thought about how conditioned we are from a young age to consume TV and movies, as opposed to theatre.
Makes me think I need to make a point of taking my (future) kids to all kinds of theatre to help them form the habit of seeing theatre.
I am not sure where this fits but when I think of my youth, I watch so much really poor quality television and movies, and it took me quite a few years to discern good from bad or to really form opinions about TV and film.
My parents never took me to theatre so I formed a love of it from the other side of the stage.
Lastly, I choose TV shows based on synopsis, ads, and recommendations – so same as films. I will also occasionally stumble upon a show. Back to films for a sec, curators of spaces can be very important, I will pretty much be up to anything showing at the Bytown, I may experience a few disappointments but not many. After last season, I am starting to feel that way about the GCTC too.
Sterling Lynch
December 20, 2010
I think your point about the quality of TV watched is important.
Like you, I watched a lot of crap before I became discerning and, even then, would often end up watching crap anyway because I was so accustomed to watching TV. Kids don’t necessarily need to see GREAT theatre they need only be brought to theatre on a regular basis and accustomed to the habit of it. I suppose this is the double edged sword of theatre in schools. It’s great to expose kids to theatre but it becomes an activity strongly associated with school. Once out of school, it is difficult to imagine kids will develop the habit of going to theatre on a regular basis, when they are accustomed it coming to them or being corralled into going.
I suspect also that your story of being involved in theatre as the cause of your appreciation of it may be very common. I think this is one of the reasons why so many theatre people struggle with outreach and audience development initiatives. It is difficult for us to put ourselves in the position of a person who doesn’t make theatre. So it’s harder for us to figure out why a non-practitioner would come.
And, I see a trend here across all the comments. For those of us who count theatre as a priority, it is not the most important art in our life.
Absolutely, a respected curatorial function is essential because it builds a relationship of trust.
nadinethornhill
December 14, 2010
BTW, I just saw your response to Rusty. Your clarification helps – thanks.
The arts I consume most frequently are television and music. I enjoy experiences and television is a cheap myriad of distilled, easily accessible experience. Because I watch television via Internet, I can watch literally any time I want.
Music is similarly flexible. It doesn’t cost a lot. I have hardware that allows me to listen anytime, anywhere. I usually listen to music either as pleasant background noise or as a way to encourage activity…like when I run.
Neither television nor (pre-recorded) music require undivided attention. I like that I can consume both while I’m engaged with other tasks.
Sterling Lynch
December 16, 2010
You are very welcome! Kudos to Rusty for spurring the clarification.
And what you say here is also very helpful. Let me see if I’m reading you correctly: TV and music come out on top because they are inexpensive, convenient, and easily integrated into other activities.
Is that accurate?
Also, who sells you on a particular show or song or artist? A friend, an expert, or something else?
nadinethornhill
December 20, 2010
You are correct, sir!
Once upon a time, I stumbled upon most new music randomly…usually stuff from the radio. Now I frequently use generating tools, primarily iTunes Genius. And — as dumb as this sounds — hanging out at Old Navy. They pipe in a lot of funk and acid jazz, so I’ll often hear something new that I like while I’m shopping.
TV is either personal recommendation from friends or online reviews. I watch most episodic television on DVD, so I’ll sometimes try a series if multiple seasons are available. I figure something that has been on the air for three or four years probably has some merit.
Sterling Lynch
December 20, 2010
Overall, it sounds like random discovery within a trusted curatorial context (radio, Genius, a particular store known for playing a particular genre of music).
And for TV you apply a survival of the fittest model, which makes sense. Again, it’s a question of curation by longevity.
Bryn
December 15, 2010
I’ve studied (to a small extent) both business marketing and arts marketing. There is some overlap, of course, but I think they’re fundamentally different. That being said, while art doesn’t solve any problems for me, per se, there are some really big reasons why I keep it in my life. I’ll post those later on when I get home from work.
As for what “sells” me art: Quality, friend involvement, relevance, and price.
Sterling Lynch
December 16, 2010
I look forward to what your additional comments!
If you have the time to elaborate on why you think there is an important difference between arts marketing and other kinds of marketing, I’d love to read more. As you can probably tell, I don’t see any important conceptual/strategic differences, but I happily admit there will always be important tactical differences. I’m curious to hear if this is what you mean or if you draw the line somewhere else.
Follow up questions: How do you assess quality? Also, what do you mean by “relevance”? Do one of an of these consideration trump the others?
Dave Charest
December 16, 2010
Well, hello there.
1. Which of the arts do you most often consume and what problem does it solve for you?
Music, Movies & Theater – Each of these things makes me feel something. Something the redundancies of everyday life do not. They also allow me to have an opinion about something I care highly about on a personal level.
2. Who convinces you to buy your preferred art? – Trusted artists, friends and then if something perks my interest.
Sterling Lynch
December 16, 2010
Dave! Thanks for your very useful reply.
Again, let’s see if I’m reading this correctly: successful music, movies, and theatre invokes a unique feeling and provides you an opportunity to exercise your critical faculties with respect to something about which you are also passionate.
And I read: if someone with a passionate judgment you trust, says “go,” that’s good reason to go. What are the sorts of things that otherwise perk your interest?
And given where you live, please answer me this: when you go to theatre, what percentage of the time do you see something you i) love, ii) enjoy, iii) tolerate, or iv) that causes you physical pain its so awful. If anyone else want to chime in on this question, please do!
My hunch: because there is so much theatre going on in NYNY, your experience of theatre might be more akin to our experience with movies i.e. by the time your bum is in the seat, you are pretty sure you are going to get what you came for and enjoy it.
Or is it a game of roulette for you too?
Dave Charest
December 20, 2010
“What are the sorts of things that otherwise perk your interest?”
I find pleasure in finding things that others haven’t heard of yet. There’s a sort of status that comes with being to person to discover talent outside the mainstream.
“when you go to theatre, what percentage of the time do you see something you i) love, ii) enjoy, iii) tolerate, or iv) that causes you physical pain its so awful.”
I would say most times I enjoy the process of theater regardless of actually enjoying the piece. The enjoyment comes from being able to talk about it afterwards. Love or hate. Obviously, I’d rather love it than hate it.
Unfortunately, between making theater and having kids I don’t get to nearly as much as I’d like to. But at least at APAC (Astoria Performing Arts Center) we’re making stuff I love. And I get to bring the kids.
Other stuff can be a game of roulette for sure.
As for your assessment, while it’s not wrong from an intellectual point of view, in terms of marketing be careful not to skew too much away from the emotional qualities of a statement.
If I were to read what you wrote I wouldn’t connect with it at all.
If I look at what I wrote again for the emotional qualities, I’m saying everyday life is boring and redundant. Music, movies and theater allow me to feel something other than bored.
Make sense?
Sterling Lynch
December 21, 2010
Thanks for the follow-up!
Even in a place as competitive as NYNY, with so many people vetting shows, the risk of a near death experience in the arts remains…. hmm, much more to think about here.
Point well made about not losing sight of the emotional qualities. I agree. I’m definitely operating at a level of abstraction than is inappropriate for a campaign. And to pursue your point further, what are the emotions that you most like to feel? “Not being bored” is helpful but it also captures a whole range of emotions. Is there a particular emotional fix that you seek in the arts rather than somewhere else. E.g. For music, it seems that one of its important features is that it provides an opportunity to create a sense of pride (e.g. I found this great piece of music, I’ve shared it with you, and you are now better off because of it.)
I’m reading: 1) the feeling of status associated with discovering and sharing; 2) a catalyst for (presumably a specific kind of) conversation; 3) an experience that isn’t boring and not like everyday life; 4) something that (presumably sometimes and not all the time) can be shared with the kids.
This is very useful stuff.
Wayne C.
December 19, 2010
1. Music is the art I consume most regularly followed by literature, film/tv, and then theatre. I like sharing music with others (playing music at gatherings), I also enjoy listening to it on my own (that’s the closest I get to meditation), and I enjoy the quest to find new and exciting artists/songs. Being one of the first to like an artist has a huge appeal for me.
2. Like others, I value the opinions/work of trusted artists, trusted distributers (certain dj’s on internet/university radio) and trusted consumers/friends.
Sterling Lynch
December 20, 2010
Thanks, Wayne!
I understand the mediation function of music but I’m not sure I understand the sharing function. By sharing music, what problem are you solving. Is it a kind of a gift, is it a way of curating your space, is it a way of expressing yourself to the group, or all of the above?
The trust factor rings loudly again!
Dave Charest
December 20, 2010
Sterling,
Sharing is HUGE in regards to music as I see it.
It makes you feel good. Cool, whatever.
If you can turn another music lover into a fan of one if your favorites there’s a rush associated with that. Almost a parent to child feeling.
In fact I can’t think of many things cooler than sharing music.
Sterling Lynch
December 21, 2010
That’s awesome to read!:)
I probably don’t get it instinctively because I must have a very different sort of relationship to music. But I think that may be blog post in itself…
Wayne C.
December 22, 2010
A kind of curation, which is a form of expression.
Sterling Lynch
December 22, 2010
Gotcha!
Rob Bhatia
January 7, 2011
Hey Sterling, nice to get back in touch with you- I like your question as I was recently selling my services as a Recruiter to various corporate entities. To answer your question, not sure if you consider Sports to be part of the Arts umbrella, but I consume a lot sports- in fact, I would say 90% of my entertainment comes from watching sports. I think there are several problems being a fan of sports solves- 1) It placates the competitive nature withn me (2) it substitutes religion as a means to identify with some form of community or a “we” (3) It provides me with a sense of civic pride and is a lot easier than community work
Who sells it to me- Sports generally sells itself but I think being a fan of a particular sport team usually stems from residing within the city of associating fond memories to that particular sport.
Sterling Lynch
January 9, 2011
Rob! Thanks for reading the blog and posting a reply. It’s very much appreciated! It’s great to hear from you again too!
I think a younger version of me might have bristled at the thought of comparing sport and the arts, however, my opinion has changed considerably. I think sports can be artful and the arts can learn a lot from the success of sports — as your answer illustrates.
I like your point about civic pride because it is insightful and provides a good point of contrast between the arts and sport. I think the arts tries to tap into people’s desire to contribute to the community (support the artist, help the arts!) but misses the mark because the pitch is too artist/art-centric and, insufficiently, civic. People support the local hockey team not only for the sake of the hockey team or the sake of hockey generally but because the successes of that team fill them with a sense of pride that is community wide. The arts, I think, would benefit greatly from tapping into this kind of civic pride and engagement. Friendly competition with other communities is key!