Audience Engagement's No Man's Land

Rick Lester | June 27, 2013
What in the heck do the words "audience engagement” mean?  

I recently attended the Theatre Communication Group (TCG) Annual Conference in Dallas, where a major focus of discussion was that very topic. For three days, I listened to panelists, questioned participants, and considered the discussions. I met many bright managers who passionately explained how they are trying to bridge the perceived gap separating potential audiences from their theater companies. I regret to report that no one could offer a concrete definition of the term “audience engagement”.  

It seems to me that two separate meanings and means of measuring success are intertwined in the use of the term:

• One meaning addresses an organizational need to sell more tickets, as measured by sales volume and earned revenues.  

• The other is code for addressing organizational or community dissatisfaction with the composition of the audience already in attendance.  Everyone knows we live in a multicultural world. If our audiences are measured as “highly educated, wealthy older white people,” organizational relevance becomes difficult to manage on any level. 

When pushed, not a single manager I encountered at TCG with “audience engagement” in their job title (or job description) could distinguish the difference between goals for audience growth and diversity.  This is worrisome.
Read more

---

Not a Marketing Problem. We have to recognize that audience engagement by diverse audiences is not a marketing issue. Clever messages, slick campaigns or better search engine keywords completely miss the point. 

Creating greater diversity is an issue of mission and, ultimately, product. Improved audience engagement encompasses every decision an organization makes—especially those influencing what we put on stage, in our exhibits and collections.