Orchestras and Social Media Survey: Preface

Nonprofit blogger Beth Kanter recently highlighted two new research studies about nonprofits and the adoption of social media released by Weber Shandwick and Philanthropy Action. These studies yielded some interesting results.

The Weber Shandwick study of 200 nonprofit executives revealed that an overwhelming majority (85%) will use more social media in the next two years. There is extensive experimentation with social media in the nonprofit sector, but only half (51%) are active users. Most nonprofits (52%) do not currently have the infrastructure, staff and expertise necessary to take full advantage of social media’s potential, and ultimately, for most nonprofit executives (79%), the true value of social media has yet to be determined for their organizations.

The Philanthropy Action study questioned the use of social networking for mid-size nonprofits and concluded that ―in terms of fundraising and attracting volunteers, metrics that most nonprofit boards and executive directors highly value, the available evidence suggests that social media is not very effective.

How do orchestras stack up in this environment? What kind of resources do managers commit and how active are orchestras in social media? Do orchestra managers share the opinion that fundraising and attracting volunteers are highly valuable metrics, or do they have different goals and objectives?

Orchestra survey

There has never been a comprehensive, industry-wide look at if and how orchestras are using social media. In order to get a clear and complete picture of what is happening with orchestras and social media around the country, I sent around a survey to 53 orchestra marketing, communications and web managers in October and November, 2009. I received 15 responses and my gratitude goes out to each of the orchestra managers that responded.

The survey was designed to collect details about the state of social media, ranging from budget size and time allotment to attitudes and goals. It was not meant to single out organizations, or show what is good or what is bad. All responses have been tallied to provide a comprehensive, collective report that aims to aid orchestra managers in years to come.

Blog series

Next week, I will kick off the Orchestras and Social Media Survey 2009 series on my blog by publishing the full report, followed by in-depth posts about the different findings.

I am doing this to provide an opportunity for feedback and discussion. I believe, and even hope, the survey results will raise more questions than answers. I am interested in hearing your thoughts on what it all means and how orchestras can use the results to inform a better, more strategic approach to social media.

So if you have any questions or comments about the survey, don’t hesitate to contact me at dutchperspective (at) mcmvanbree.com, and stay tuned to the blog to join the discussion about the survey next week.

Check back for the full report on Monday. (Full report can be found here)

Search engine marketing and orchestras: part 4

Now that you know a little bit about how ads show up and the typical account structure, let’s look at three important, interdependent aspects of paid search: key words, creative and landing pages.

First, you have to build a key word list for each of the ad groups. The categories make it easier to think about what to use, but do the research. Know your industry and competitors (both in the real as well as the search world), understand your goal, and use your patron’s language.

Here are some tips for key words:

Key word themes should take into account the different phases of the buying cycle (and your creative and landing page should align with these phases as well).

The Adwords Keyword Suggestion Tool shows suggestions for “Los Angeles Philharmonic Tickets” from the high volume “concert tickets” to the lower volume, yet more specific “walt disney concert hall schedule” and “la philharmonic tickets.”

You have to tailor your creative and your landing pages to these specific themes. Patrons who search “concert tickets” will be in a different phase of the buying cycle than people who search “la philharmonic tickets,” and those people will be even in a different phase than others who search the more specific “la philharmonic tickets beethoven.”

Each of these phases should generate different creative and guide the customer to a different landing page.

Let’s look at creative first. You should do continuous testing of customized messages in order to get maximum relevancy (quality score!) and maximum efficiency, click-through and conversion rate (depending on what your goal is). Specific ads typically convert more sales, general ads generate more clicks.

Keep in mind that the creative consists of the title (approx. 25 characters); the description (2 lines of 35 characters each); the display URL (e.g. www.laphil.org); and the invisible destination URL (e.g. http://www.laphil.com/tickets/2010/beethoven).

The example above could make up the following ad (keep in mind it’s sample copy; you will have to test different variations to see what works best!):

LA Phil plays Beethoven
Hear music by Beethoven at the LA Phil. See complete schedule and get great deals!
www.laphil.org

This ad would bring people to a full schedule of Beethoven concerts by the LA Phil (the fictional destination URL from above). This brings us to landing pages. So you’ve used the right key words and persuasive creative to land people on your page. What to do now? First, make sure that the page your patrons are reaching is the relevant page they were looking for. Assuming you want the patrons to take some kind of action (fill out a form, a survey, or simply buy tickets), make sure that that process is easy and short.

Drew McManus, in his Orchestra Web Site Reviews, has been telling managers for years to keep the purchasing (and donating) options short and painless. Don’t make users log in before trying to purchase tickets and don’t create unnecessary steps in the purchasing process. Make your landing page relevant and your purchase process clear and concise. Your conversation rate will depend on it.

Targeting your ads

Besides targeting your ads through key word selections, you can set other parameters to more specifically attract your desired audience. One of the main options is geo-targeting.

Let’s say someone searches “beethoven concert” without indicating a specific orchestra or location. Bidding on this high volume key word might be expensive and for someone in Atlanta an ad about a Beethoven concert in Los Angeles would not be relevant (so no click-throughs or conversions). But if someone searches that term in Los Angeles, it would most definitely be relevant. You can target your ads specifically to Los Angeles, California or a something-mile radius from a certain point. You can also indicate several different locations. Keep in mind, however, that the location of the user depends on the server they use, and that server might not be located in the area in which they live.

Another targeting method is using the hour of the day or day of the week. Perhaps your budget is limited and you have found that your best click-through and conversion rates happen on Friday at 4 p.m. You can specify your ads to only show up around that day and time. Yet another method is targeting on language. Perhaps a Mariachi group is scheduled to perform at the Walt Disney Hall. You might specifically target Spanish language searches.

Paid search performance metrics

You can’t set up a paid search effort without measuring your performance and using that data to optimize your efforts. But beware for over-analyzing; there are many factors influencing click-through and conversion rates, including external factors that have little to do with search. Don’t analyze every day; make it monthly or quarterly.

Click-through-rate (clicks/impressions) is a simple metric that is often used to demonstrate the effectiveness of your ad and ad copy. But unless you’re aiming to create general awareness, a click-through-rate might be misleading. More important is your conversion rate (# of orders/clicks) and your ROAS, or return on advertising spend (sales amount/costs).

For example, what would be better: a high click-through-rate with a low conversion rate, or a low click-through-rate with a high conversion rate? Well, it really depends on the exact numbers you put in and on your ROAS.

You can, for example, calculate your maximum cost-per-click based on ROAS. Let’s say you are aiming to make $5 on every advertising dollar spent, you have a conversion rate of 1.5%, and your average sale amount is $165. Your maximum cost-per-click would be ($165/$5) / (1/0.015) = $0.49. You can also determine your max CPC based on your desired cost-per-acquisition.

Benchmark your baseline performance metrics and set and check milestones along the way.

A little bit more about conversion rate. Let’s say, your average order is $100, your conversion rate is 1.25% and your sales revenue on your Web site from paid search ads is $100,000 annually. That means 1,000 out of 80,000 people who clicked-through that year purchased tickets. Well, let’s say you tweak your ad copy to be more effective, perhaps change your landing page a bit, and make the purchase process easier. You’ll get a conversion rate of 1.5%. Out of 80,000 people who clicked through, now 1,200 will purchase tickets. That means your sales revenue is $120,000. You tweak some more and you hit the 2008 e-commerce industry conversion rate average of 1.75%. You’ll now be making $140,000 annually.

Small changes can mean big results. Test, measure and optimize. Once again, you can’t live without measuring your performance and using that data to optimize your efforts.

This concludes the four part series on search engine marketing and orchestras. I have glossed over some of the basic concepts and hopefully shown that search engine marketing, both natural and paid, should be important parts of your online marketing and communications strategy. Remember that Rome wasn’t built in a day either, so take your time to find your groove. But I can’t mention enough that you should try things out in small steps and monitor for results, then use that data to optimize.

Search engine marketing and orchestras: part 3

After a couple more classes and a Thanksgiving break, I’m back with renewed energy to write more about search engine marketing and orchestras. This time, I’m covering paid search. As I wrote before, if natural search is public relations, then paid search is advertising. Paid search is instantaneous, direct and controllable, extremely measurable, and when done right, very cost effective.

To keep things simple, I will only be looking at Google, as it represents by far the biggest share of the pie, but other search engines will work in roughly the same manner. I will go into the basics of how an ad shows up, what a typical account structure looks like, tips and information about key words, creative, landing pages and targeting, and, of course, performance measurement. I’ll be taking the Los Angeles Philharmonic as an example this time. They currently do some paid search, but as I have no knowledge about its structure or strategy, I will ignore their current efforts and create a theoretical case.

What is paid search?

Paid search, or pay-per-click, is an Internet advertising model. This model is used by networks such as Google AdWords, Yahoo! Search Marketing, and Microsoft adCenter.

Advertisers pay these companies only when their ad is clicked. In these bid-based models, the advertisers pay the companies only when their ad is clicked. The advertiser competes against other advertisers in a blind auction.

How does your ad show up?

Although the exact algorithm is a secret, we know that your ad position is determined by two factors: quality score (relevance) x maximum cost-per-click (the highest amount an advertiser is willing to pay for one click).

Your quality score is determined by different kinds of relevance: the click-through-rate on Google.com (clicks divided by impressions), which shows how relevant consumers think your ad is to their query; the key word and ad text relevance to the query, and landing page quality and relevance to the query.

Here follows a simple, fictitious calculation to demonstrate that the New York Philharmonic would be positioned above the Los Angeles Philharmonic, despite a lesser willingness to pay.

Quality Score x Max CPC = Ad Rank
New York Philharmonic: 2.0 x $0.40 = 0.80
Los Angeles Philharmonic: 1.4 x $0.52 = 0.73

Keep in mind, the guy positioned below you sets the price; your cost is $0.01 more than the spot below you. So what does the New York Philharmonic pay per click? Remember that the actual cost-per-click is the same or lower than the maximum cost-per-click. In this case, the New York Philharmonic pays 0.73 (LA Phil Ad Rank) / 2.0 (NY Phil Quality Score) + $0.01 = $0.375 per click.

The bids are blind; organizations cannot see a competitor’s click-through-rate, max/actual CPC bid, or quality score. So you’ll need to tweak you own bid in order to gain prominence. But remember, as you can see, improving quality score is an effective way to raise ad position, while controlling costs.

Paid search account structure

Your paid search strategy is not just simply bidding on your own brand. In fact, your brand is probably a very small portion of the whole effort. You have to know, and test, what your patrons are looking for and use their language.

A typical account structure begins with the account itself; in this case the Los Angeles Philharmonic. The account has different campaigns. When I looked at the LA Phil’s Web site, I saw an almost natural ordering of the campaigns right on the front page: classical concerts, jazz concerts, world music concerts, and pop, family & others (and we can go on and create campaigns for brand, recordings, Dudamel, the Hollywood Bowl etc.).

Those different campaigns will be divided into several ad groups. For example, when hovering over the classical tab, concerts include Los Angeles Philharmonic, visiting orchestras, baroque variations, celebrity recitals, casual Friday, and chamber music.

Each of these ad groups will have scores of key words and certain key words can be grouped together with the same creative (ad copy) and landing page. But stay tuned for more about that in the next part.

Here below is an illustration of a part of the fictitious Los Angeles Philharmonic account structure.

Search Account Chart

Search Account Chart

I am aware that, unlike retailers such as Target or Home Depot, inventory for tickets at orchestras has a time limit and is ever evolving. Perhaps you could further divide Los Angeles Philharmonic concerts by weekly program and create key word themes for each of the weekly programs, ranging from repertoire to guest artists. You will have to make those decisions based on how you want to categorize your campaigns.

It will all make a bit more sense in the next part, when I delve deeper into key words, ad creative and landing pages. Stay tuned.

Search engine marketing and orchestras: part 2

The third class went a little deeper into natural search. I think it’s important to first reiterate some important matters. Search engine optimization (SEO) is not an overnight process; it might take 6 months for your efforts to show any results. The goal of SEO is to be the Web page with the most relevant content, all else follows.

There’s a difference between paid and natural search and I like to compare it with the difference between advertising and public relations. In very broad and general terms: advertising is paid, you control the message, but it is not as credible; public relations is “free,” you can’t control the message, but it is more credible.

Without further delay, here are some key lessons. This time, I used the Nashville Symphony Orchestra as guinea pig where needed.

  • You can’t optimize for an unlimited amount of terms. If you optimize your site, you want to optimize your home page for high volume words (remembering the 80/20 rule). Pages below the home page can be optimized for more specific terms.
  • Check to see what you’re up against. Your real-world competitors might not necessarily be your search engine competitors. Searching for the term “Nashville classical music” does not lead to the Nashville Symphony Orchestra. In fact, it does not lead to any classical music ensemble or opera company whatsoever. The search competitors are a radio station, a review site, an event listing site and a record label. In other words, not necessarily organizations you would see as competitors for tickets.
  • Are you speaking the language of our audience? In other words, do your key words match up with the search terms of our audience? Don’t use jargon, give people what they want. Sometimes, this might be counter intuitive, especially when you have to consider your branding efforts. For example, although you might want to brand yourself as “assisted living,” you will get searched as a “nursing home” (which has double the results). You will have to balance your branding and SEO efforts.
  • If your Web site has an internal search function, collect the data. This will offer great insight on what your audience wants and what terms they are using. If you’re interested in general trends and in what kind of searches are related to high volume terms, you should use Google Insight for Search.
  • What’s the deal with NOFOLLOW links? Links from Twitter, Facebook, Google Ads and most advertising banners tell spiders not to follow the link. Does this mean that they are useless for SEO? No. Mihaela Lica writes: “People don’t care about “nofollow” attributes. If they see a link and they think the content it leads to is interesting, they follow.” SEO is not just about getting links, it’s about creating and promoting valuable, relevant content.

Now for some specific coding and technical advice:

  • Spiders can’t crawl images, JavaScript and Flash. Don’t go overboard and balance your design and SEO efforts. Nick La has an excellent blog post “SEO Guide for Designers.”
  • Use the “title” tag wisely. Use a different title for each page, otherwise Google might think you’re offering the same content on multiple pages. Keep the title short; around a 90-character limit.
  • Always use “alt” tags for images. Not only is this user-friendly for people who are blind or visually impaired, it enhances your SEO efforts.
  • Always use a descriptive anchor text (don’t use “click here” or “read more”). Links can even have a “description” tag.
  • Use the meta “description” tag if you don’t want the search engine to describe the site for you. Nashville’s Web site is described by Google as: “The Nashville Symphony is joined by the U.S. Army’s premiere singing ambassadors, the Soldiers’ Chorus of the U.S. Army Field Band, this Thursday through…” As you can see, this is momentary copy that does not accurately describe the whole of the organization, and it gets cut off! Compare this to the tailored copy of engine manufacturer Briggs and Stratton: “Find out why Briggs & Stratton are the leading makers of small engines, lawn mower engines, portable generators, and home generators.” Keep the description below 170 characters (about the size of a tweet!).
  • Many sites work with dynamic content. Make sure the URLs that are generated are optimized. Session IDs, especially if they grow really long, don’t tell much about the content. For example: http://www.nashvillesymphony.org/main.taf?p=9 could be transformed into http://www.nashvillesymphony.org/parking_and_directions (this is advice I should heed for my own blog!)

Once again, these are only some of the lessons. Stay tuned for more in the coming weeks.

Search engine marketing and orchestras: part 1

This week, I started my second class in the Integrated Marketing certificate program at the University of Chicago’s Graham School. This one’s on search engine marketing, taught by David Gould of Resolution Media. Last night’s class delved a little into natural search and search engine optimization and there were some interesting points that I wanted to share while trying to put them into a cultural environment. Where needed, I’ll mostly take the Chicago Symphony Orchestra as an example, for old time’s sake.

  • Search is someone telling you what they’re looking for. And for a marketer, that’s pretty powerful stuff.
  • Check your organization’s Web site without images and JavaScript enabled. This is roughly the view that the search engine spiders see. What do you see? Here is a Wordle of the Chicago Symphony’s page:
CSO Keyword Wordle

CSO Keyword Wordle

  • The Long Tail of Search and the 80/20 rule. About 80% of the search volume comes from 20% of the keywords. The other 80% of the keywords are very specific keywords. But the specific keywords usually are much more likely to be associated with an action and are much more likely to end up as a sale. For example, a major keyword could be “classical music,” whereas a specific keyword sounds more like “Chicago Symphony Orchestra tickets.” In other terms, the major 20% that drive 80% of the volume create awareness; the specific 80% that drive 20% create actions and sales.
  • A quick word about paid search. You can clearly see the difference in paid search: the New York Philharmonic has bought certain keywords, whereas the Chicago Symphony Orchestra has not. In fact, searching for the CSO results in sponsored links to the Lyric Opera and the Goodman Theater! Those organizations must assume that if people search for the CSO, they must also be interested in other forms of cultural entertainment. In terms of natural search, both orchestras see heavy competition with third-party sellers. Looks like they need some optimization!
  • Another important lesson is that natural search is more than just optimizing your own site. It’s optimizing your content, including content on social media sites such as YouTube and Facebook and even Yelp. Both the New York Philharmonic and the Chicago Symphony’s social media efforts are appearing below the fold and in some cases not even until the second page. Organizations need to optimize so that their social media efforts appear above the third-party sellers, at the very least!
  • Search engine marketing does not work as a silo. Look at it as part of your integrated marketing efforts. Online, including banner ads, and offline, including radio spots, television spots and print ads. Integrated efforts are proven to be much more effective.
  • Perhaps most importantly, keep in mind that 80% of Web browsing starts with search and those searches are spurred by offline stimuli, including your offline marketing efforts. Be sure to streamline the two.

There were more lessons and more takeaways and the class has just barely started. Future classes will lead to future posts, but let this conclude part 1 of search engine marketing and orchestras.

Classical music on Twitter

Last updated: 10/23/2009 – 8:00 a.m. (CST) (Lists moved to new address; update forms changed: see below)

Inspired by Amanda Ameer’s post on classical music publicists on Twitter and Beth Kanter’s query on a list of arts twitterers, I gathered a preliminary list of more than 150 twitterers in the classical music scene.

I intend to create the most inclusive, elaborate list of classical music twitterers. I know I have left many, many people and organizations out. That’s why I have opened up two forms to add or update your information: if you are a person twittering about classical music, please add or update your information here; if you are an organization twittering about classical music, please add or update your information here. Or alternatively, you can leave a comment below.

Any suggestions on categories or changes to the format, please let me know in a comment below or at dutchperspective (at) mcmvanbree.com.

People

The list of people in classical music on Twitter can now be found here: http://mcmvanbree.com/dutchperspective/twitter/people.htm

Add or update your information here

Organizations

The list of organizations in classical music on Twitter can now be found here: http://mcmvanbree.com/dutchperspective/twitter/orgs.htm

Add or update your information here

Adaptistration’s annual Web site review

The ever-thorough Drew McManus has once again shown that his Web site Adaptistration is the place to be for orchestra managers. This year’s Orchestra Web Site Review has an in-depth analysis of American and Canadian orchestras and their sites.

Particularly interesting, I thought, was today’s post on the comparison between American and Canadian sites. Overall, as it appears, Canadian sites do a better job. American orchestras reached higher highs and lower lows, but the Canadians did a better overall job with Web site fundamentals.

I found it interesting that, as Drew writes, “The only category where US orchestras not only dominated but increased at a faster rate of improvement over their Canadian counterparts is in Dynamic Content. By and large, US orchestras offered a higher quantity and quality of social networking offerings.”

But out of a maximum score of 15, on average the score was only 7.16, less than half. I suspect this has a lot to do with the quality of the offerings, rather than the quantity. Sure, many orchestras have started to use Twitter and Facebook, or have incorporated dynamic and social elements, but other than a few shining examples, it’s close to a butcher picking up a scalpel in the surgery room.

One new offering in this year’s Orchestra Web Site Review was reader participation. You can give your own zero-to-five star rating for each orchestra’s Web site and leave detailed comments in a discussion section. Drew tallied the scores on October 5, as you can read here, but the reader review is still open for participation.

The Orchestra Web Site Review is truly an invaluable source. The only one of its kind since 2004.

Social media, money and the mission statement

During last week’s League of American Orchestras conference, I was following the session on social networking on Twitter. Mark Pemberton, who tweets @aborchestras, asked where the “business” is in social media. In a blog post on the League’s conference blog, he wrote:

I found today’s Social Networking session interesting up to a point. But Russell Jones was spot on in his cry of “what about the dollars?” The speakers kept talking about the “new business model.” But Facebook and Twitter have no business model! They have no means of generating income.

Here is an excerpt of what I commented on his post:

Social networking is not “a business model.” Social networking is a tactic or tool in your strategy. Most managers will want to see dollars coming in from social networking in the short term. But that is exactly the wrong approach. Social media is not a short term solution. To think so is short-sighted.

Going into social media with the objective to sell tickets is, in my opinion, wrong as well.

There is a lot of pressure in marketing and public relations departments of orchestras to sell tickets. Fewer subscriptions bought and more single tickets to sell means more and harder selling. It’s not surprising that a lot of managers look at social media as an addition to their marketing and sales efforts.

In these departments, it might almost seem that selling tickets is the organization’s mission statement. I was glad to see another post on the League’s conference blog. Alan Jordan posted the following:

A constituency session comment re-iterated a line shared with me a long time ago from a concert hall manager in Concord, NH who passed away from cancer a few years back: the official moniker for 501(c)3s is not “non-profit,” but “not for profit.” For profit firms are obligated to their shareholders to produce results. We are obligated to the public to produce results, and those results are not necessarily—and most beneficially—financial ones.

In my comment to Mark Pemberton, I continued:

Although nonprofits need to make money to operate, they are not here for profits. Social networking/media can help you in your core mission: bringing art and music to people. It can extend the life of a performance and engage and build communities. And that’s a goal or objective too.

Beth Kanter writes about return on investment on the NTEN blog and hits the nail on its head:

If you approach ROI as a financial analysis only, you’re missing the point. An ROI process focuses on identifying and unpacking the benefits of efficiency and effectiveness and how these support your organization’s mission.

Well, what is your organization’s mission exactly? Let’s look at some of the mission statements from orchestras around the country:

New York
To maintain and foster an interest in the enjoyment of music and musical affairs, and to inculcate in its members in the community of New York city and the nation at large, an interest in symphony music and in order to foster such interest and the appreciation of music, among other things to cause the performance of symphonic and other musical performances in the concert and other halls, over the radio, television, by phonographic recordings, and in any other manner now known or hereafter to be.

Chicago
The central mission of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra Association is to present classical music through the Chicago Symphony Orchestra to Chicago, national and international audiences.

London
The LSO’s mission is to give the finest performances of music and make them available to the greatest number of people.

These statements speak of bringing art to communities and audiences the world over. While ticket sales and revenue are important for the financial stability of the organization, the statements do not mention financials.

Clearly, the New York Philharmonic’s statement was written decades ago—yet still pertinent—and I particularly like “in any other manner now known or hereafter to be.” Let’s add the Internet to the list.

Alexandra Samuel has an interesting article at the Harvard Business blog on why nonprofits are so good at social media. Although the article should have been more appropriately named why nonprofits are uniquely primed to be good at social media—because not many are so good—she does bring up a couple of excellent points. Alexandra writes that “in the nonprofit sector, relationships have always been the key currency.” How can social media build upon those relationships? She outlines five points, three of which I thought particularly noteworthy:

Engage your audience by speaking to their core concerns: What do your customers care about most, and how can you speak to those concerns?

Offer a mix of tangible and social benefits: What tangible benefits can you offer that will encourage their participation?

Innovate within the bounds of your core mission: What value or services do you offer that could be delivered through a social network or online community?

In the SWOT analysis found in my Orchestras and New Media e-book, I look at some of the market opportunities best suited to company strengths and capabilities: maintain strong relationships with patrons; extend the life of a performance; and open the door to other geographic and demographic markets. (Read the e-book for particular examples.)

Sure, it is okay to think about monetizing these market opportunities to strengthen your financial base, but more importantly, you should start thinking about how they can help your organization’s core mission of providing classical music to audiences in your community and around the world.

That’s your first order of business. Heck, that’s why you’re in business.

A German orchestra and social media: Philharmonie 2.0

When I wrote the blog series and e-book on Orchestras and New Media, I looked almost exclusively to the English-speaking world. But there are some really interesting things happening in the rest of the world. On Twitter, for example, I’m following some classical music organizations from the Netherlands, including @radio4nl and @muziekgebouw.

And a short while ago, I found Christian Henner-Fehr (@kulturmanager), or rather, he found me. Christian has an interesting blog named Kultur Management and he told me about the stART Conference in Duisburg, Germany, which will take place in September of this year and looks like a must-see event for any European arts managers that want to know more about social media.

A little while later, Frank Tentler, who is also involved with the stART conference, contacted me about the Duisburger Philharmoniker project Philharmonie 2.0. Frank told me in an e-mail he normally works with corporate clients, but:

it is possible to create a company-like concept for an orchestra. I was fascinated: normally you have to create a story to tell at first, then to produce content around the story. But here all content was lying in front of me and I only had to pick it up and lead it to the most important communities.

As project manager, he built a team including a musician, a content manager, and a professor in communication design and his students. And, as Frank writes, “with this experience, I had the idea for a conference – the stART.09. One of the co-initiators, Christian Henner-Fehr told me, that he had contacted you, too.”

Don’t you just love the possibilities of social media and social networking? Through my blog and Twitter I was able to connect to these great resources and share thoughts and comments.

I had a brief look at the Philharmonie 2.0 concept as introduced by Christian and Frank. Frank also forwarded an article from a German orchestra trade magazine, which describes the project, its successes and core ideas. What stood out from the article was the following sentence:

Klassische Musik hat kein Problem mit ihrem Inhalt – es geht darum, mit ihr Leute persönlich anzusprechen

Or, in English, “classical music does not have a problem with its content; the point is to speak personally with your patrons.” Indeed, as I wrote in my brief SWOT analysis, content is one of the main strengths of orchestras. Use it to connect. And make it personal. And talking about content, a lot of content by the Duisburger Philharmoniker is licensed under a Creative Commons label. Smart move.

The channels used by the Duisburger Philharmoniker include Twitter (including separate accounts for the general manager and conductor, although there has not been any recent activity), YouTube, Delicious and Flickr. The orchestra is most active on its blog and they seemingly reach out to newcomers as well, inviting bloggers and Internet users to a free concert (reminiscent of San Francisco’s blogger night). Strangely, and unfortunately, although the orchestra is actively blogging, there are not a whole lot of user comments underneath its posts.

I will keep an eye on these developments in Germany and will continue to browse around the Philharmonie 2.0 project. If only to keep up my fast-dwindling German language skills. I’m curious to see if the orchestra will keep it up and what they learn in the process.

Mach’s gut!

Orchestras and New Media: A Complete Guide

After the blog series and presentation on orchestras and new media, I have just finished an e-book called “Orchestras and New Media: A Complete Guide.” In this book, I look at the current print environment and arts coverage, followed by the new media revolution and what it means for orchestras. Alongside a description of tools and sites, I offer thoughts on how to adapt your press materials and how to measure your results. A SWOT analysis includes examples and two brief case studies provide more insights.

» The e-book can be downloaded for free from my Web site.

Executive Summary

The past 30 years have seen a significant proliferation of arts organizations and activities throughout the country. Cultural participation is up, yet arts coverage in print is down. But it would be an error to attribute this downturn to an attack on the arts. Newspaper circulation numbers have been going down since the mid 1980s; from a daily circulation of over 63.3 million in 1984 to a daily circulation of 50.7 million in 2007. On the other hand, monthly unique visitor numbers for newspaper Web sites rose from 41 million in January 2004 to 75 million in January 2009.

In the past decade, the Internet has moved to more participation (encouraging contributions), openness (no barriers to content and feedback), conversation (listening, not just broadcasting), community (gathering around a common interest), and connectedness (sharing content).

Seeing the decline in traditional arts coverage and the proliferation of culture, brands and media, the inevitable, it seems, is an increase in participation, openness and connectedness with your community, invigorating the conversation about the arts. And new media is here to help.

Survey the environment, determine what you are trying to accomplish and then find the right tools that work for you. The best advice to start? Just explore! Here are some of the places you must know about: blogs, Facebook and MySpace, Twitter, Flickr and YouTube, Digg and Delicious, Yelp, Wikipedia and Last.fm.

Connect with bloggers and content generators: read (know who is writing and what they are writing); participate (become a genuine and active member); build relationships (provide good customer service); and adapt materials (personalize your pitch and remember you are working with a multimedia outlet).

Social networking sites are the embodiment of new media; more than any other service they encourage participation, openness, conversation, community, and connectedness. Keeping that in mind, your approach to social networking should be based on the following three rules: add value; online relationships complement offline relationships; and provide content to be shared and syndicated.

Sharing content, word-of-mouth, is one of the key strengths of social media. Measuring results, however, especially return on investment, can be difficult. Page views and unique site visitor statistics can only tell you so much; they don’t tell you what kind of activity. In its most basic form, your measurement should consist of the following elements: interest: how interested are people in your company; attitude: what attitudes do people hold about your company; action: what actions that matter from a business perspective do people take as a result of your campaign?

The last step is to determine what impact these results have on your organization and the future actions of your organization. From a detailed SWOT analysis, the following recommendations ensued: use your strengths as cornerstones for strategy (content, brand, audience and infrastructure); pursue market opportunities best suited to your strengths (maintaining strong relationships; extending the life of a performance; other geographic and demographic markets; and collaborations and partnerships); and correct weaknesses that impair pursuit of market opportunities or heighten vulnerability to external threats (budget for new media; hire or train staff; review limitations of media contracts and copyrights; and keep track of changes in technology).