Strength in numbers

There is an irony about culture. On the one hand, creative outputs are jealously guarded by their inventors and protected by intellectual property law. On the other, collaboration is often the catalyst for innovative ideas. This makes creative partnerships something of a challenge. Being part of a network of other arts professionals can help to demystify the creative process for new entrants into the industry who are, as the Culture and Creative Skills Council puts it, “qualifications rich, but skills poor”. In a funding drought, being able to present the arts as a collective force rather than pockets of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) whose management and output is a mystery to funders, can only be a good thing. Can organisations in the same area but with different outlooks work together successfully?
Clustering was first championed as a big business model in the early 1990s. The US economist Michael Porter was its major advocate. He claimed that for businesses to avoid the ravages of globalisation they should work together in networks grounded in a local area, to pool resources, realise economies of scale and be more competitive. This worked in manufacturing industries which shared similar commercial values and obstacles to production. But what could be the benefit to an industry that is essentially a melange of small businesses with varying outlooks – both commercial and community-focused – whose outputs are often temporary, such as exhibitions and plays? Clustering was first advocated by regional development agencies in 2004. Partnering organisations helped government to make sense of the creative industries. Management in the arts can be at odds with the government’s regimented organisation. The arts appear disorganised to government, because they work on a micro scale and are often project-based and dynamic. If SMEs pool together, they become more visible. A collective funding strategy could mean larger projects become viable, which could help to fulfil tourism and regeneration priorities. This is the economist Adam Smith’s idea of the hidden hand: the reputation and expertise of a few partners in turn benefits the whole cluster. Those taking a backseat on a particular project still benefit from their association with the rest of the cluster.
United we stand
Clusters of arts organisations are dotted all across the country. Places such as Hackney in inner London have evolved into creative hubs. The disused manufacturing houses have been reinvented as arts factories. Hackney is home to the Arcola Theatre, the Hackney Empire, and community-focused theatres running education programmes. For the artistic but less commercial venues such as Arcola, which in the beginning struggled to get revenue funding, partnership was a way of fulfilling educational priorities. Arcola is a founding member of Hackney Theatre Partnership (HTP), a theatre cluster which was originally set up by the local council, and which receives funding for a part-time Co-ordinator, Steve Harris. Harris claims that partnership works well because its members are comfortable with the level of commitment demanded from them and the risk management involved. “We are not a charity or a limited company because that would mean setting up all sorts of bureaucratic structures that the partners want to avoid,” he said. “Instead, individual companies within the partnership take on full liability for a project even though it will be steered by a partnership project management group. This approach encourages different partners to lead or take part in at least one project each year and helps strengthen the network.”
HTP’s Theatre Pathways programme is led by Immediate Theatre, which applied for the funding to the London Development Agency (LDA) and is supported by a steering group drawn from the partners. It holds workshops and training in box office, administration and technical stage management skills. HTP partners have offered staff to run workshops, and free use of their facilities. The Pathways Co-ordinator said, “The strength of our bid for the LDA tender came from the evidence of previous project work by all the participants in the cluster, we had that reputation behind us.”
 

In the black
Having healthy balance sheets also affects a partnership’s success, and was a crucial issue in the Stratford arts quarter in East London. On the edge of the Olympic Village, Stratford is now the scene of a massive regeneration effort. As part of this, the cultural quarter has been revamped. A cluster of venues are part of the cultural forum for the regeneration of the town. However, the original cluster initiative which began in 2001, experienced disastrous set backs. Stratford is home to the Theatre Royal, which had intended to initiate joint marketing ventures. Communication gradually broke down between the Theatre Royal and the newly built Stratford Circus, which was experiencing serious management and financial problems. The volatile nature of the sector suggests that partnerships work best when they are flexible. In the Hackney cluster, the ethos was that partners could play as big or as small a role as suited them. National touring companies such as Theatre Centre and Quicksilver Theatre could play a more minor role, but by being part of a local partnership they could still be on the radar of the council or regional development agency.
Cluster partners often found they had more influence than individual companies, because of size and facilities. Theatre Centre and Quicksilver Theatre simply didn’t have the staff or space to take on education programme trainees, but the other venues did.
The Vincent Dance Theatre, part of the Sheffield cluster Creative Industries Quarter, found the partnership beneficial, but were outnumbered in their quarter by digital media and commercial companies. Marketing Officer Katie Bough said, “As a result I think the benefit to arts organisations is less. Although this possibly doesn’t apply to arts organisations who have a venue, studio or other building resources.”
Clustering together
It remains to be seen what the benefit for audiences will be. In most of the clusters examined here there was very little artistic collaboration: venues are deterred by funding and risk management concerns, not to mention artistic differences. In HTP’s case, it could in future mean a more collaborative approach to programme planning by Arcola Theatre and the Hackney Empire, the two major Hackney theatre venues. Ultimately, partnerships depend on the will of their participants. Collaborations are only as good as the people involved. It is human capital that matters for the partnership as a whole to work. In some cases this has given clusters real bargaining power. In one London borough, the co-ordinator of an arts cluster is now advising the local borough’s Cultural Partnership Officer and the Cultural Industries Development Agency. The Partnership Officer put the cluster’s success down to the co-ordinator’s management: “They have an excellent facilitator who knows the sector and provides a very strategic role in furthering the progress of the Partnership, so they are much more self-sufficient than other groups and don’t need our intervention.”