Seth Gordon, my very good friend from college recently posted a link on his Facebook Wall to a podcast he did for the local NPR affiliate in Yellow Springs, Ohio, WYSO.  The podcast was part of a series called “This I Believe.”  Seth’s comments, “Fortune Cookies”, were on how there are small moments throughout your day that give you hope, wisdom, and calm.  He started on this thread talking about fortune cookies.  These moments allow you to make sense of the world around you, see the big picture, and, inspire you to keep on keeping on:

“I hold to the idea that unlikely sources of hope and wisdom will come at me every day if I just have the capacity to listen and engage. Sometimes they change my worldview for just a moment and sometimes they help me decide which color paint to buy.

“My ability to listen closely to the pulse of my perceived world keeps me on my toes; from wrapping my faith too tightly around the scientific or the latest one sizes fits all metaphysical formula.

“For me, the fortune taps into some primal reservoir of trust in the universe – it is the prompt for a days events; the straw that breaks some block of indecision. Words on a slip of paper are caught by sensitive brain receptors that say ‘you need to hear this.’”

Ever since I met him over ten years ago, Seth has exhibited his passion for learning.  Even greater is his ability to find inspiration in what many others may gloss over.  He meticulously absorbs details and is constantly asking himself how he can use his newfound knowledge to better his profession and the world.

His pursuit of knowledge is infectious.  Whenever he visits his family in Rhode Island, he tries to make it up to Boston.  We meet for breakfast or coffee, and he always has a new book to recommend.  We end up talking passionately about our professions, working through fresh and raw ideas.  We try them out on each other and, most important, listen.

Seth has recommended Michael Lewis’ Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game. While being a great read for a die-hard baseball fan like myself, the book also made me reconsider professional theatre subscription acquisition strategies.  This came at a time when I was working at New Repertory Theatre, and we were in the strategic planning for the move to the company to the Arsenal Center for the Arts in Watertown. How Moneyball changed my way of thinking, is a blog post in and of itself.  When Seth read Moneyball, he was reconsidering how small liberal arts colleges develop their admissions strategy.

Seth is a creative ambitious thinker.  His curiosity never fails him It fuels him.  I daresay his curiosity serves as inspiration and motivation.

It definitely inspires and serves as a reminder to his friends to never be satisfied, never rest on your laurels, and always be learning.

Over the past few years at meetings with marketing colleagues in the Boston theatre community, I have found there to be more and more buzz about Google Grants.

What is a Google Grant?  It is in-kind Google AdWords advertising for non-profit organizations.

Online advertising still fascinates many non-profit arts organizations.  For some, it is still a great unknown or deemed a risky investment.  The traditional methods of direct mail, telemarketing, print advertising, and e-communications (yes, it is now well established and “old”) are used.  Budgets are tight and a high return on investment is needed.  This reduces the amount of risk marketing staffs are willing to take.

Also, I would speculate that many non-profits prioritize internet marketing strategy lower than more traditional or comfortable strategies.  That being said, when an organization is given an opportunity to use up to $10,000 per month in Google AdWords advertising, it is difficult to pass up.  Especially when the advertising is considered, for all intents and purposes, free.

However, just because something is free, it doesn’t mean that it isn’t a valid opportunity.  Instead, like every other opportunity, it should be maximized for the fullest benefit in both the short and long term.  A Google Grant is a booster shot–a significant jump start—which, if implemented correctly, can provide a solid foundation for an internet marketing strategy, bolstering a non-profit organization’s web traffic and potential reach.

This is what Google has in mind, too.  An organization that consistently uses $9,000 of the $10,000 per month grant for three consecutive months may be eligible to have the grant increased to $40,000 per month in Google AdWords.

In order to maximize the potential long-term benefits of a Google Grant, a non-profit cannot only rely on the $10,000 per month AdWords spend. In addition it can invest in an overall internet marketing strategy which includes Search Engine Optimization.

Last year, Hubspot had an article on their blog “Stopping The Google AdWords Morphine Drip: How We Saved $183 Last Week”.  This article is reminds us all that other ways exist to drive traffic to an organization’s website.  At his talk, “SEO 101: Search Engine Optimization Basics” from the Inbound Marketing Summit, Dharmesh Shah, followed this comparison by reminding everybody that the Google AdWords system is a bidding system–meaning that as time passes the cost of having a specific ad appear as sponsored result will go up.

Google Grants has imposed some discipline in the bidding process for executing a grant with a maximum bid of $1.00 per click.  You can read a full explanation of all the restrictions here. Here are the key elements:

1. Maximum bid of $1.00 per click.
2. Relevant, mission-based keywords and advertisements.
3. Ongoing, active management of the organization’s advertising campaign.

Google acknowledges that advertising on some words may not be possible.  Instead, the organization will have to find other relevant words on which to advertise.  While this may be a disappointment to the organization, it may wish to contemplate when the cost of other essential and important keywords may also become out of reach or above the $1.00 bid.  This is one of the key reasons why the Google-imposed $1.00 maximum bid provides an impetous for the organization to find other ways to be found online.  What the Google Grant provides is a window of opportunity for the organization to be found in a major search engine while it, at the same time, works on optimizing its website to be found through organic search.

In order to strategically implement a Google Grant, I would make the following five suggestions:

1. Develop a keyword list through brainstorming how people would find your product through organic search.  When developing this list prioritize relevance to the organization’s mission over the traffic from the specific word.
2. Strategically implement the Google Grant on a large number of relevant keywords maximizing the daily spend. Test your advertising text, consistently tweaking it for the highest click-through rate.
3. Install a free analytics program like Google Analytics which will help you to start gathering data on how people find you on their website and what they do when they land there.
4. From the beginning of your grant’s implementation, plan for the time when you will no longer, within the confines of the grant, be able to bid on specific keywords.  Do this through allocating part of your budget on internet marketing and search engine optimization.
5. If you don’t have one on staff already, hire an internet marketing strategist to review and optimize your online presence, and your reach in Google.

The November 2008 edition of Fast Company has a great article (“Abusing Social Media”) about how companies are experimenting with the latest technology tools and, instead of reaping the rewards, are embarrassing themselves online.

“Thanks for nothing, Web 2.0. With each sexy bit of social media that catches fire with users, lame companies get another fresh opportunity to pretend they know how to connect with customers without understanding what they’re doing. No business is abandoning traditional advertising in favor of these gimmicky, halfhearted efforts. They’re just abandoning any self-respect they once possessed. Whee!” “Abusing Social Media”, Fast Company, November 2008.

What’s unfortunate about these major failures and their use of social media is that other organizations are hearing their stories and are staying away or making the same mistakes.  Companies aren’t investing the time to learn how to do it right.

Take Twitter for example.  I am quite fond of this extremely popular microsharing service.  My recent tweets are posted on the sidebar of my blog.  Through using TwitterFeed, I’m able to link new posts on my blog to Twitter.  Facebook has an application where my tweets are posted as status updates.

All of this makes me more efficient in my distribution.  However, it doesn’t automatically make me a better communicator.  Improving those skills takes time.  I need to listen to what is being said to me and thoughtfully respond.  And, I do mean, thoughtfully.  With the constraint of 140 characters the requirement to be concise, brief, and effective is definitely a good thing.  I’m often teased for being long-winded.  I respond to those jabs with: “I just like being thorough in my communications and conversations!”

The Fast Company article brings up companies that are tweeting their press releases rather than using it to build relationships and community.  Note to companies: This isn’t building a relationship, it’s broadcasting.

The embarrassing usages of social media aren’t about how the technology isn’t good or an effective use of time (remember time equals money). Instead it is about forgetting how to communicate.

These companies as well as many non-profit organizations still believe that the internet is just a broadcast medium–if they put their information out there, of course, everybody is going to read or listen to it.  You can’t just “blast” it out there and hope for the best.  This isn’t a Field of Dreams “If you build it, they will come” medium.

What these companies have forgotten is that they have to do some listening to their current customers and some research to discover where they hang out online.  They have to spend time to cultivating the relationships.  It isn’t enough to just have your information or event posted online, you have to make sure your constituencies can find you.  To solve that, maybe you should do some inbound marketing.

Over the weekend I started reading Groundswell.  There was an interesting thought about ratings sites that I’ll paraphrase here:  If company starts to receive negative reviews about the product, it isn’t because people are out to get the company.  It may actually be that there are problems in the product.

The same holds true for internet marketing.  If you have an event on a social media site that only a few people have RSVPed for or you don’t have that many followers on Twitter, or your patrons are ignoring you online, it may not be because they aren’t interested or that they don’t like you.

Instead, it may be that there are problems with your strategy: You’re broadcasting instead of communicating and building relationships.

Last night the Harvard Bookstore hosted a panel discussion and a debate party at the Brattle Theatre. Unfortunately, I missed the discussion beforehand but was fortunate enough to make it inside.

As a self-proclaimed political junkie, just the idea of a movie theatre-sized debate party was intriguing, exciting, and thrilling to me.  I’ve been watching the debates with friends and family members, but watching it in a dark theatre with a room full of strangers was going to be a different experience.

It’s October 2008, and it’s, once again, the nexus point for two events that I watch closely: A Presidential Election and October baseball.  Back in 2004 when asked, a member of the theatre community said the best theatre of 2004 was the Red Sox versus the Yankees in the American League Championship Series.  You really couldn’t get a better script than that.  If you’re a New Englander, that is.

I’ve found sports and politics to have the same type of entertainment appeal to me.  Baseball players are playing a game–the same game they did as children–for an exorbitant amount of money.  We should all be so fortunate, right?

These days, most political events are heavily scripted with carefully constructed talking points.  Occasionally, the script is interrupted with off the cuff reactions or gaffes.  We watch the debates for these moments just like a Sox fan watches for the sheer thrill of seeing David Ortiz launch one into the Boston night.

Last night, the Brattle was packed.  The audience was surprisingly diverse.  No age group appeared to dominate the crowd. The younger people weren’t necessarily students either.  No obvious, simple demographics.  I was pleasantly surprised.

The Harvard Bookstore served pizza and sodas while the transition was made from the panel to the movie setup.  You could feel the excitement in the theatre.  There was a sense of freedom and, perhaps even curious, anticipatory fun.

The Brattle Theatre is in the heart of Harvard Square in Cambridge, Massachusetts.  Given those facts, you can imagine the political profile of the crowd.  For full disclosure, include me in that group, too.  Any candidate who has an Arts Plan (pdf) is a friend of someone who has worked for non-profit arts organizations for the past seven years.

I didn’t know what to expect. I had watched all the other debates on CNN. On HDTV there were the pundit scorecards along with what Bill Maher termed the “candidates life force.” Uncommitted Ohio voters weighed in with their instant approval or lack thereof.  Watching previous debates on CNN, many opportunities existed to instantly learn how other people were reacting.  Now that I’ve spent time on news sites like Talking Points Memo, I see that CNN had a split screen view so viewers could see how the other candidate reacted as they listened to their opponent’s responses.

To me, pre and post debate chatter is a lot about listening to what mass media experts are feeding the uncommitted voter.  At all the small debate parties I’ve been to, once the candidates stop talking my companions and I do.  Later on, I go to my favorite blogs, Twitter searches as well as their Election site, and the mainstream media sites for a roundup.  After the first debate, a friend dubbed me the “Human RSS Reader”.

My friends and I were surprised the Brattle was showing PBS’ coverage of the debate through New Hampshire Public Television rather than a mass media outlet.

Soon after the debate started, the lights were turned out just like a movie.  The candidates were announced and the crowd reacted with applause.  People were fairly active and vocal with hoots, hollers, clapping, and laughing, so much that one section started hushing others so we could all hear the answers.

Cheers broke out with relative frequency after Obama’s responses.  And, not to be a completely one-sided group, there was some scattered applause and cheers for McCain.  A friend assured me that it was just one person.

I don’t know if there’s a comparable experience I have had in a movie theatre.  The only one that comes to mind is when I saw Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 911.  The audience at that one seemed more homogeneous because everybody was aware of the narrative.

During the debate I was having a collective experience with strangers in a dark room.  The audience was, of course, well informed.  Everybody knew the subjects that may come up (William Ayers and ACORN) but, of course, there were surprises, too, like John McCain introducing America to “Joe the Plumber.”

I’ve spent a good deal of my professional life contemplating audiences who gather in dark rooms for live performances.  Just like this time, I’ve watched the splitscreen shots of the carefully selected uncommitted voters from swing states on television as they watch the debate as a group.

I’ve seen great drama on stage.

I’ve been riveted by cinematic experiences.

I’ve seen heroes like Bob Dylan close in intimate venues.

I’ve seen the Red Sox come back against the Yankees at Fenway Park.

This was something completely different: A shared experience with total strangers, a moderately-scripted theatrical event with potential for sparks and spontaneity.  This event along with others had and has the potential to change the present course of our country, our economy, our world, and our lives.

Thank you to the Harvard Bookstore and the Brattle Theatre for creating such an experience.  It is a true public service.

Yes, indeed.  I am a political junkie.  And, I do love great theatre, too.

Yesterday, I came across a fascinating article by Michael C. Gilbert of the Nonprofit Online News. The article, “Become a Blogger and Relax, A Systems Approach to Information Overload” was incredibly thought-provoking.

The basic premise is that blogging combats information overload by requiring the blogger to focus on what is important.  Considering that most people who work at non-profit organizations wear multiple hats, prioritization is key.  At any job we’re inundated with new ideas, some good, some not so hot, and we are always juggling multiple projects.

To me, what Gilbert is saying is that making time to filter and focus allows us to effectively communicate what is important to both our colleagues and our audience.

Just like a CEO, an Artistic or Executive Director could round up a week of experiences in a blog post internally to the company or to the audience.  As a result, the staff or audience members can succinctly understand the following:

This is why we are doing a specific initiative.

This is why it is important to our mission and who we are.

This is who we wish to be looking into the future.

And, most important: These are the questions we have.  What are your thoughts?

It allows for a conversation to start.  It allows for a synergy of ideas within your staff or constituencies. You can communicate what the organization believes is important and put it out there for public consumption, debate, and conversation.

It also demonstrates a willingness to listen and learn.

To me, blogging serves the same purposes my high school Humanities teacher wished for journaling to do:

You’re supposed to be working on understanding yourself.  You’re not supposed to be afraid to have ideas.  You’re supposed to be thinking, listening to feedback, learning, processing, and further articulating your ideas and, even, having new ones.

Blogging should teach organizations and individuals to be fearless in respectfully and responsibly stating opinions so we can create engaged conversations.

A friend of mine sent me this David Foster Wallace quote in the context of marketing:

You’ve not only got the problem of representing the truth but you also have to consider ‘What’s gonna sound true? In writing or music: what’s going to hit their nerve endings as true in 2006, or 2000 or 1995?’  It seems to me that the nervous systems that now receive all this information today are vastly more complicated, difficult, cynical, and overhyped than they used to be.  The easy example is, and one that I go over again and again with students in my writing class is: these students are far more afraid of coming off as sentimental then they are coming off as twisted, obscene, gross– things that used to be the horrible aspects you didn’t want to portray about yourself.  And it would appear that the great danger of appearing sentimental is that sentimentality is mainly now used in what would appear to be very cynical marketing and mass entertainment devices that are meant to sort of manhandle the emotions of large numbers of people who aren’t paying close attention. So that some of the most urgent themes or issues like ‘how to deal with mourning the loss of someone you love very much’ have been so adulterated by cynical commercial art that it becomes very, very, very difficult to think about how to talk about in a way that’s not more of that crap.
-David Foster Wallace

I replied with:

Advertising signs that con you
Into thinking you’re the one
That can do what’s never been done
That can win what’s never been won
Meantime life outside goes on
All around you.
-“It’s Alright, Ma, I’m Only Bleeding”, Bob Dylan

and added in:

Most corporations, on the other hand, only know how to talk in the soothing, humorless monotone of the mission statement, marketing brochure, and your-call-is-important-to-us busy signal. Same old tone, same old lies. No wonder networked markets have no respect for companies unable or unwilling to speak as they do.

But learning to speak in a human voice is not some trick, nor will corporations convince us they are truly human with some trivial  lip service about “listening to customers.” They will only sound human when they empower real human beings to speak on their behalf.

While many such people already work for companies today, most companies ignore their ability to deliver genuine knowledge, opting instead to crank out sterile happytalk that insults the intelligence of markets literally too smart to buy it.
-The Cluetrain Manifesto

At the core of all three quotes is the changing role of what a marketer is: Someone who builds a community.

I am always thinking of a David Mamet quote about the responsibility of being a playwright.

I may not have it word-by-word correct but the essence is “Never assume that your audience, collectively, isn’t smarter than you are.”

The same is true for marketing.  Too often it becomes about a catchy sales phrase as opposed to authentic communication.  More and more consumers aren’t trusting the materials a company produces. Instead they rely on the voice of the community at large.   It’s too easy to type something into Google and find reviews.  We want people who are paying attention because they will become the customers that speak on our behalf.

When marketers are the consumers, we do the research online.  We use Google.  We need to respect our customers by expecting them to do it as well.

Recently, I was reconnecting with an old friend, and I learned he now worked in the web industry as a flash designer.  He mentioned to me his desire to learn more about web design, but said that he needed to save up money to purchase Adobe CS3. I told him I would compile a list of resources for immersion.

I asked him if he had read Jeffrey Zeldman’s Designing With Web Standards.  He said he’d heard of it but hadn’t read it.

Designing With Web Standards is the first book on my list.

I came to web standards later in my education about web design and strategy.

I started learning HTML when some sites were tagged with the small icon “Best Viewed in Netscape Navigator”.  Early web design classes were focused on learning HTML and Dreamweaver instead of understanding why we design something in a certain structural way.

I’ll admit it, I was taught to design with tables.  Knowing the speed at which technology evolves, I have always been committed to life-long learning and professional development.  (Is there another choice?) At some point (and I don’t remember when) it was time to read DWWS.

I highly recommend and suggest it.  It is required reading.  Plus, I don’t think I know anybody who wouldn’t like Zeldman’s sense of humor and writing style (maybe this says more about me, though).

Zeldman’s long-running personal site is one I visit on a regular basis.

Before I read DWWS, I already had learned HTML and had also was fairly skilled in using Dreamweaver.  I believe if you’re going to learn Dreamweaver you’re going to need to learn HTML, too.  It’s a quality product but you still have to be able to debug and troubleshoot.  You cannot be afraid to get your hands dirty under the hood of your design.

Design is often strategic problem solving, and it should be expected that there will be troubleshooting and change. Being fluid and competent in foundational, building-blocks is essential.  For this reason, I would suggest Lynda Weinman’s excellent series of books and online tutorials to learn programs.  I would also suggest WestCiv’s incredibly useful tutorials as well as their CSS program, Style Master.  Do your own research and decide which is right for you.

Far and away the best resource for web design is A List Apart.

I have literally spent hours going through the archives of ALA exploring subject after subject and I know I’m not the only one.  If you’re new to ALA, I would suggest reading “The ALA Primer: A Guide for New Readers” and “The ALA Primer Part Two: Resources for Beginners”.  These two articles will lead you to essential reading both on ALA and beyond.

Understanding web design is far more than just knowing how to use a WYSIWYG, a mark-up language, or any specific program, so there is definitely more information to absorb.  One of the first books I read on web usability was Steve Krug’s Don’t Make Me Think.  It is still a must read.  I gave my dog-eared copy to a colleague to give him an overview and, since then, he has said he believes it is required reading for anybody working on the web (I still haven’t gotten it back yet!)  Last year, at An Event Apart, Steve Krug spoke with his “Web Usability Diet”.  If you have the opportunity to see him present, don’t pass it up.

As is the case with any profession, keeping sharp and up on new events and opportunities is essential.  Long ago, while I was earning my BA in theatre a professional actor told me and other students (paraphrasing):

“You keep taking classes while you’re working because it is all about tools for your toolbox.  It gives you more angles to approach a role or situation.  You can never have too many tools.”

I take the same approach with web design, strategy, and utilizing the internet to market and promote.

That being said, one of the places where I find a marvelous community talking about the web is Twitter.  People share their links and ideas in 140 characters or less.  Here are some people to follow:

• Jeffrey Zeldman (mentioned above, of course)
• Rick Sanchez from CNN (he started using Twitter while covering Hurricane Gustav and there is now an interesting interplay with his live show and tweets)
• Steve Garfield (mobile video broadcaster in Boston)
• Gary Vaynerchuk of Winelibrary.com
• Jared M. Spool (usability)
• Sooz (web marketing, event planning, and photography)
• Lee LeFever (offering some of the best instructional videos on technology)
• Charles McEnerney (Podcaster, Social Media Consultant, & Director of Marketing for ArtsBoston)
• Jeffrey Veen (a web innovator)
• Chris Brogan (social media)

For news alerts:

• BreakingNewsOn (The News Wire Alert-find out before most news sites or the television does)
• CNN Breaking News
• NYTimes.com Alerts

Stay connected and informed.  And, go out and get more tools for your toolbox.

AARONOW:  What.  What kind of outfit are we running where…where anyone…
ROMA: (to himself) They stole the phones.
AARONOW: Where criminals can come in here… they take the…
ROMA: They stole the phones.  They stole the leads.

- Glengarry Glen Ross by David Mamet

Mamet’s Pulitzer Prize winning play was written in a sales age before cell phones.  To cripple a company all you had to do is take away the phones.

Every professional theatre company where I have worked has developed, at one time or another, an obsession with the phone lines.  This obsession isn’t unwarranted.  If patrons are not able to get through, they aren’t able to buy tickets over the phone—a possible disaster. The channel needs to operate seamlessly.

What about ordering online?  When do we become obsessed with the internet?

Over a year ago, Jakob Nielsen wrote an Alertbox called “Do Government Agencies and Non-Profits get ROI from Usability?” After reading this article, I thought about the obsession over phones:

• Are the phone lines open?
• Are calls being dropped?
• Can we free up people to answer more phones?

A few essential questions an organization needs to answer:

1. What percentage of calls to the box office are transaction related?
2. Can non-transaction related traffic be easily directed to a company’s website?
3. Are there benefits of ordering on the phone versus online?

If the answer to questions 2 and 3 are “yes” then there needs to be a greater emphasis on load balancing and channel management.

It’s time to become obsessed with the web.

And, it is time to improve the usability of the website.

Typically, the phone-related obsession happens after the phones start ringing.  When the phones are quiet, the focus is on getting them ringing.  There is an assumption that everything that is in place is sufficient.  And, it may be.  However, do we exhibit stronger strategic planning behavior when we are reacting to success rather than preparing for it?

The most common reaction is pulling staff members from their regular duties to answer the phones so tickets may be sold.  What sacrifices are being made?  For the marketing staff,  it may be the execution of a strategy for the next show.  What about the fundraising implications, if it’s a member of the development staff?

There are costs to every solution.  However, there are web solutions that may provide long term sustainability and growth. Investing in a usable website promotes a pleasant customer experience and repeat buyers.  The website may be able to manage more transactions than the phone system.

Think of the following scenario:

1. A prospective ticket buyer calls a theatre company.
2. They are put in a queue or get a busy signal.

Three Key questions to answer about this scenario:

1. How long does someone wait before they abandon their call?
2. How many times do they call back before they give up?
3. Why aren’t they going online?

In this scenario here’s how you can categorize patron behavior:

1. Patron sticks it out and eventually buys tickets over the phone. You may have taken up a lot of their time, though.  The theatrical experience better be worth it.
2. Patron gives up. A lost purchase making them dissatisfied and disappointed. What if these patrons go online?  If they do that, there is another chance they are converted into ticket buyer or a patron of the organization.

However, the experience is subpar if the organization’s website is not easy to use or there isn’t the same service or choice for the patron who opts to buy online versus over the phone

Then, there is real value to purchasing over the phone.  Is it worth the wait?

The patron needs to be comfortable and confident they will receive the same quality of service online as they will over the phone.  Their experience needs to be the same or better.  They need to be convinced it is okay and maybe even more convenient for them to purchase online.

Overall, organizations need to keep tabs on the quality of their customer experience and on potential web usability problems.

Arts organizations need to start benchmarking the following data:

Single Ticket Transactions

• Percentage sold over the phone
• Percentage sold in person
• Percentage sold online

Subscription/Single Ticket Transactions

• Percentage sold via the mail
• Percentage sold over the phone
• Percentage sold in person
• Percentage sold online

Research needs to be done to determine whether there are trends in behavior based on geographic location or type of organization.

Four years ago when I first met Tom Holm at Enertex Marketing, he mentioned how many arts organizations in the San Franscisco Bay Area were no longer including snail mail order forms on their brochures.

Sounds like blasphemy doesn’t it?

He said that the mail-in order forms were no longer being used.

Shouldn’t that be a goal, though?

Just think of the money that could be saved and reinvested in other areas!

Now is the time to start thinking about the customer experience of your website.  It is time to make it easier to use and more effective.  It is time to change patron behavior, encouraging them to consistently make online transactions.

If not, what will you do if someone steals your phones?

Over the past year, I have worked with the Boston-area, web marketer, event planner, and photographer, Sooz on bringing bloggers to see productions at the American Repertory Theatre.  We’ve conspired at length about what it would take and what opportunities exist.

This is part of a mission I have in creating conversations about theatre online through introducing novice, or even occasional theatergoers to new experiences.  At the Blog session at the Boston Theatre Conference, I mentioned that my goal with these conversations is to create a judgment-free place where people can write about their experience.  These theatergoers are able to experience the organization with fresh eyes.  They get to tell their story.  It changes online narrative about what the customer experience is of the play.  The dominant narrative may no longer be the expert view from a critic.

When I was growing up, on the way to the theatre (whether I was about to see Shakespeare or Shaw) my parents would give me an outline of the play I was about to see.  It was enough that I would understand what was going on, even if I didn’t completely understand the language.  I was supposed to be able to identify theatrical devices and structural elements.  On the drive home, we would have a half-hour discussion where I would be asked what I thought of the piece.  I was nine years old or so.  To this day, after my parents come see a performance at any theatre I have worked at, there is always a debriefing .  Experiencing a work of art doesn’t only happen in the theatre or a museum but in the conversations it creates.

Of course, I know I’m not the only one who has had these discussions. It is one of the wonderful parts of theatre.

I know adults with no theatre-viewing experience.  They may be uncomfortable and maybe even a little embarrassed.  They have them, too.  And, we should encourage these conversations to happen.

What Sooz and I are trying to do by inviting bloggers to the A.R.T. is create an environment in which those conversations are able to happen.  I have read eloquent stories on blogs.  People beautifully document their lives and passions.  They tell us of their experiences.

We’re almost getting back to basics of what it means to be an audience member and creating an online framework for how patrons may experience art.  We’re trying to expand the experience after the curtain goes down.

If you’re a blogger and might be interested in seeing Anna Deavere Smith performing Let Me Down Easy on September 16, learn more and RSVP here.

Over the past two days I have been at An Event Apart in downtown Boston.  Just as I did last year, this two day conference provides an overview of the best of what is going on with web design and strategy today My batteries were recharged and I felt inspired. 

Two days of presentations and speakers saturated with useful information would be too much for me to recount in this brief format.  Instead, it would be better to read Jeffrey Zeldman’s post that includes several useful links.

Like most people who work in a group context, when I return from a conference, I am often asked to briefly summarize either the major point or even the top three points I took away.  At the Boston An Event Apart in 2007, I found myself contemplating Cameron Moll’s presentation, “Good vs. Great Design” most of all afterwards.  After working with arts organizations and non-profits for many years now, I have found myself thrust into areas of problem solving.   Moll’s presentation was particularly useful because it focused on how the articulation of the problem impacts the probability of finding a solution.  The essence of it was about the strategic approach to problem solving and how coming up with the most effective solution depends on whether the problem has been truly discovered and articulated.  To read more about how this impacts web design and strategy, I would recommend his article on A List Apart, “Good Designers Redesign, Great Designers Realign”.

So, what did I take from the 2008 version of An Event Apart?

First of all, I was really interested in Jeffrey Zeldman’s first session “Understanding Web Design”.   I was pleasantly surprised to learn the results to hear him to present the findings of the 2007 Web Design Survey. The core of what Zeldman presented was how those who work on the web must, as a community, advocate for the respect the strategic integration of web technology in an organization.  To be more succinct, working on the web is a profession where the members have a significant amount of strategic knowledge they employ.  It’s not just about learning HTML or Dreamweaver just like a high school or college student. On doesn’t become an expert social media strategist by spending a lot of time on Facebook.

Yet cash-strapped arts and non-profit organizations are often obliged to  rely on the kindness of volunteers, unpaid interns, and high school students looking for community service hours.  Over the past few years, I have been wondering when things will change so that professional staff and resources for web strategy will become a commonplace priority for organizations of all sizes.

Secondly, I found three sessions useful under the subject matter of “Design Strategy, Process, and Inspiration” which included Jason Santa Maria’s “Good Design Ain’t Easy”, Doug Bowman’s “Design to Scale”, and Christopher Fahey’s “When Style is the Idea”.   I grouped these three session together because, to some degree, the content provides tension and contradictions.  They each provided a different lens or perspective on the idea that design as a problem solving, scalable, visually persuasive, and ultimately compelling experience for the end user.  Doug Bowman drew from his experience working for Google (and their strategic rules or guidelines for solutions) while Fahey discussed design inspiration and process (among other things!).  Jason Santa Maria was, as I’ve come to expect, inspiring and provocative in discussing how, oftentimes, design for the web hasn’t been as compelling a medium for storytelling as print. He believes we need to set goals for viewing web design as an art and hold our design solutions to that high of a level.

Last, I would group together Jared Spool’s session “The Scent of a Web Page: Five Types of Navigation Pages” along with Andy Budd’s “Designing the User Experience Curve” as “User Experience and Usability”,  I have always considered satisfaction and pleasure in a web experience a key component of usability so, for me, these two sessions had a natural synergy.  Too often, it seems usability is regarded as creating a bare-bones interface instead of creating developing a solution that is user-focused.  As with any usability insight I found  myself absorbing it—storing it for future use as part of the many ways to look at website effectiveness.  Learning Spool’s stats about “pogosticking”, searching, number of pageviews before an item is placed in a shopping cart, and linking strategies while also considering Budd’s storytelling of customer experiences in hotels, restaurants, and other stores reaffirmed my own beliefs in pushing for user research and storyboards.  The more user data that can be contributed to the design and development process, the more successful the solution will be.  And, as Jakob Nielsen has mentioned before in an AlertBox column, the potential ROI for non-profits from usability is quite high.

All in all, this was two days well spent.  Inspirational and informative—a good way to recharge batteries.  Catch An Event Apart if it comes to your town.