Reputations on the Labor Market of
the Performing Arts
A study of personal reputation and its influence on financial success
Marijn Stockmann 5893291 15 August 2014 Thesis
MSc. in Business Studies Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam Entrepreneurship and Management in the Creative Industries Track
First Supervisor Monika Kackovic Second Supervisor Nachoem Wijnberg
Abstract
This study looked at the relationship between personal reputation and the financial success of actors in the labor market of the performing arts. To answer the
To what extent do personal reputations have an influence on the financial success of artists
reputations were measured in two separate ways. The first technique measured personal reputation as a whole with a self-assessment. Because personal reputations are
multidimensional, the second technique looked at four aspects that each measured a dimension of a personal reputation: merit recognition, representation, employment accomplishments, and occupational focus.
Of 508 approached arts alumni from the Amsterdam School of the Arts (AHK) 39 participated in a survey. The survey used a scaling method with very little open-ended questions. The findings from the multiple hierarchical regression analysis supported the hypotheses that predicted that a high level of representation and a high level of
occupational focus would have a positive effect on the financial success of artists active on the labor market of the performing arts. In the generated conceptual structural equation model the path coefficients for gender, occupational focus and representation were significant.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank: The Amsterdam School of the Arts, and Erik Lint, Joost Njio and Wouter van Loon in particular, for their participation, input and support; Elisabeth Kuiper for helping me with the mystery that is SPSS, for her chivvying and all the editing; Sigrid Richters for her corrections and nitpicking, and making me double-check my decisions; Gijs van Kooten for his support and putting up with me; and lastly my supervisor, Monika Kackovic, for her guidance, advice and inspiration over the last two years.
Table of Contents
Abstract ... ii Acknowledgements ... iii Introduction ... 1 Literature Review ... 4 Merit Recognition ... 8 Representation ... 9 Employment Accomplishments... 10 Occupational Focus ... 11 Empirical Setting ... 12 Methodology ... 19 Participants ... 19 Procedures ... 19 Measures ... 20 Dependent variable. ... 21 Independent variables. ... 22 Control variables. ... 25 Results ... 26 Discussion ... 30 Multiple Regression ... 33 Conclusions ... 42Limitations and Future Research ... 43
References ... 44
Introduction
The personal reputation of individuals is the main focus of this study. One uses the concept of reputation in everyday life easily, but reputations are not unilateral and a scientific definition of the concept will therefore always be complex and
multidimensional (Ebbers & Wijnberg, 2011). First, a clear definition of personal reputation will be composed in this chapter based on previous research and it will cover the several dimensions of the construct.
There are a few researchers who have looked at reputations on an individual level (Bromley, 1993; Delmestri, Montanari, & Usai, 2005; Ebbers & Wijnberg, 2011; Ferris, Blass, Douglas, Kolodinsky, & Treadway, 2003; Kilduff & Krackhardt, 1994). Bromley define s reputation as "a nucleus of interconnected impressions shared and expressed by a high proportion of members of a defined social network" (Bromley, 1993, p. 42). Contained within this definition there is an important aspect of personal
reputations, which is that they are relational. A reputation has no value for an individual if it is not perceived by others.
& Montgomery, 1998, p.65). The etymology of the word reputation shows that it has always been perceptual. It originally stems from the Latin reputation-, reputation, which means consideration (Webster.com, n.d.). When looking at the
Merriam-repu
(Merriam-Webster.com, n.d.) it is clear that reputation is a perception, which only has a value when it is shared (Dubois, 2012; Kilduff & Krackhardt, 1994). However,
reputations are merit based, meaning the value of the reputation is based on past performance and accomplishments (Ebbers & Wijnberg, 2011; Fombrun & Shanley, 1990; Rindova, Petkova & Kotha, 2007). Research by Fombrun and Shanley (1990)
based this results in a higher reputation. Other research has also shown that reputations are merit-based and stem from the successes and failures in a
(Delmestri et al. 2005; Dubois, 2012; Jones, 1996).
Most research on reputation looks at the concept from the resource-based view (RBV) and sees it as a resource or intangible asset that will lead to a sustainable
competitive advantage (Barney, 1991). Reputations have been described as
for a guarantee, contract, or control- A reputation
is a quality signal for the actors of a given social world (Fombrun & Shanley 1990; Spence 1973). It transmits information about the observable personal characteristics and accomplishments of individuals in the form of a signal. The necessity of such a signal identifies an informational gap (Spence, 1973). When a reputational signal is perceived it can be used as a proxy for missing information (Ebbers & Wijnberg, 2011; Shapiro, 1983; Rindova, Williamson, Petkova & Sever, 2005). A personal reputation is not just a signal to bridge an informational gap but is also a substitute for first-hand knowledge (Ferris et al., 2003). It provides expectations for future performance based on past merits.
In conclusion, personal reputations are perceptional, merit-based, and intangible. By combining these aspects of the concept the following definition of personal
reputation emerges and will be used in this study: A personal reputation is a multi-dimensional and intangible resource of an individual that signals a combination of the merit of past accomplishments and observable personal characteristics to others and acts as a substitute for first-hand knowledge of performance quality.
This study will look at the relationship between personal reputation and the financial success of actors in a labor market; because studies have found strong evidence that the reputation of individuals has an influence on their success (Hochwarter et al., 2007; Tsui, 1984; Zinko, Ferris, Humphrey & Aime, 2012). However, rather than just
looking at this relation between the two concepts, this thesis will also identify four dimensions of personal reputations namely merit recognition, representation,
employment accomplishments, and occupational focus and study their influence on the financial success of individuals. It will look at the cohesion of the concepts and attempt to develop a conceptual model with personal dimension and its dimensions as predictors of the financial success of individuals active on the labor market. (a) Personal reputation; (b) four of its dimensions; (c) financial success, and (d) the link between the two
concepts will all be discussed in detail in the literature review in the second chapter. Most of the literature that will be discussed in the literature review will already be adapted to the labor market of the cultural industries.
To study the effect on financial success a specific labor market was chosen as the empirical setting of this study. This study looks at personal reputations of artists active on the labor market of the performing arts, the job candidates. This labor market and its dynamics will be reviewed in the third chapter, empirical setting.
To understand the influence that personal reputations have on financial success they will be measured in two separate ways. The first technique measures personal reputation as a whole with a self-assessment (Hochwarter, Ferris, Zinko, Arnell & James, 2007). Because personal reputations are multidimensional (Ebbers & Wijnberg, 2011), the second technique will look at four aspects that each measure a dimension of a personal reputation: merit recognition, representation, employment accomplishments, and occupational focus. The fourth chapter will discuss both methods of measurement in further detail.
The research question that this study will try to answer is: To what extent do personal reputations have an influence on the financial success of artists active on the labor market of the
performing arts? This study will start with a review of the literature and develop five hypotheses in chapter two, then continue with the empirical setting of the labor market
of the performing arts in chapter three. The fourth chapter will discuss the methods and measures used for this study and the fifth chapter will report the results. In the
discussion the results will be discussed and linked back to the literature. In the seventh chapter a conclusion of the study will be given and in the last chapter the limitations of the study and possible directions for further research will be addressed.
Literature Review
The working definition of personal reputation that was established in the previous chapter included the signaling value of personal reputations. In any labor market there will be informational gaps that necessitate signals to be transmitted between recruiters and job candidates (Spence, 1973). These gaps stem from the information asymmetry between the recruiters and candidates. Spence (1973) reported many
Williamson, Petkova and Sever (2005) also noted that the performance quality of job candidates is difficult to appraise a priori. There are many more informational
asymmetries in a labor market, such as the imperfect information the job candidates have on the quality of the job and the employer (Cable & Graham, 2000) and the imperfect information both the candidates and the recruiters have on other available possibilities within the market (Spence, 1973).
Wilson (1985) explained that past actions could be viewed as a signal, which transmits the probability that desired behavior would be shown in future. Because the future performance quality of the candidates is neither known nor observable prior to the hiring of the candidates their personal reputation functions as a signal to the
recruiters (Shapiro, 1983). A hiring decision of a recruiter is a decision to work together with the job candidate. Game theorists have done much experimental research into the
decision-making process of working together and the influence that personal reputations have on this process (e.g. Kreps & Wilson, 1982; Mui, Halberstadt, & Mohtashemi, 2003; Rosenthal, & Landau, 1979; Wilson, 1985). From the game-theory perspective a
reputation is a requirement for such decision-making. Researchers have stated that the reputation of an individual is based on the behaviors an actor has shown in the past (Ferris et al., 2003; Rindova et al., 2007; Rindova et al., 2005). In this way a personal reputation creates the strong correlation between past actions and future expectations (Rao, 1994).
Kr
information then there is a reputation effect. They also showed that if a situation is repeated, which job seeking on the labor market of the performing arts is, it is valuable to acquire and retain a high reputation. Among other examples the labor market has been shown to have reputational features, which account for certain behaviors of working together (Wilson, 1985
expectations , 1985, p. 46). It was shown
that in labor markets job candidates would invest in building a reputation for quality performance that resulted in wages and productivity near the optimal level of the market equilibrium (Spence,1973 ; Wilson, 1985).
Several other studies have found strong evidence that the reputation of
individuals has an influence on their success (Hochwarter et al., 2007; Tsui, 1984; Zinko, Ferris, Humphrey & Aime, 2012). Although in his report to the National Endowment for the Arts (1988) Filer acknowledged that establishing what factors result in financial success would be very challenging, many authors have tried to do just that. In 1984 Tsui revealed that managers with high personal reputations and reputational effectiveness had more successful careers. Advancement rate, formal performance appraisal ratings and merit increases were all measured in his study and shown to benefit from personal
reputations. Hochwarter et al. (2007) looked at the influence that personal reputations have on job performance and showed that it moderated political behavior in such a way that individuals with higher levels of personal reputation received higher job
performance scores depending on the political behavior levels individuals had. The recent findings from the study by Zinko et al. (2012) suggested that career success, power, and autonomy were all direct outcomes of personal reputations. They also found support for the hypothesized mediation of personal reputations on these outcomes from the independent variables human capital, time, and social control and competency. These variables, which were measured as expertise, tenure and political skill, all had an effect on the outcomes via personal reputations.
Why individuals with high personal reputations have more successful careers has been studied by a few researchers. They have shown that organizational performance is influenced by the reputation of its employees (Delmestri et al., 2005; Ebbers & Wijnberg, 2011
Wijnberg (2011) researched the influence that the reputations of individuals could have on attracting capital. They showed that reputational signals of individuals influence the success of an organization. Delmestri et al. (2005) explained that a high personal
bor market. It has also been shown that the reputation of individual artists can influence outcomes such as performance at the organization level (Graffin & Ward, 2010). Besides other factors (e.g. personal preference [Godart & Mears, 2010]) recruiters looking for job candidates on the labor market of the performing arts would take possible influence on organizational outcomes into significant consideration when making hiring decisions.
Recruiters are uncertain what characteristics and performance quality to expect from job candidates because they have had no first-hand knowledge based on previous
known or observable prior to the hiring of the candidates their personal reputation would not matter to the recruiters and no signals would be necessary (Shapiro, 1983). Reputation is a signal to bridge the informational gap and also a substitute for first-hand knowledge. Hogan and Shelton (1998) suggested that a person's reputation is used to predict a person 's performance. It provides the recruiter with clearer expectations on the future performance of job candidates based on their past merits. Hiring decisions and wage negotiations will be based on the expectations that personal reputations generated. Delmestri et al. (2005) went so far as to state that in the film industry a reputation is not only beneficial for a director, but that it is necessary to succeed in the market. Therefore, the expectation is that job candidates with higher personal reputations will have more financial success. The first hypothesis of this study looks at personal reputations as a whole and the effect that such reputations have on the financial success of the job candidates in the chosen labor market.
H1: A higher personal reputation has a positive effect on the financial success of artists active on the labor market of the performing arts.
Besides looking at personal reputations as a whole this study will also study the effects of its different dimensions. Because, personal reputations are considered to be multidimensional (Ebbers & Wijnberg, 2011), the next part of this chapter looks at four aspects: merit recognition, representation, employment accomplishments, and
occupational focus. Each of these is thought to measure a dimension of a personal reputation.
Merit Recognition
Ferris et al. (2003) identified several of aspects of reputation, one of which was performance evaluation. In the cultural industries these evaluations would come from the
ws were explained to be examples of such external recognition (Ferris et al., 2003). This study will look at both these types of recognition. Awards and reviews have both been shown to influence the reputations of the artists that receive them by reducing the uncertainty of the expected performance quality (Graffin & Ward, 2010). Radbourne, Johanson, Glow and White began their study on measuring quality in the performing arts by stating that an assessment of quality
p.16). Several researchers have found strong evidence that in the cultural industries recognition by third parties will signal performance quality to consumers and result in higher financial success (Anand & Watson, 2004; Deuchert, Adjamah, & Pauly, 2005; Gemser, Leenders, & Wijnberg, 2008; Ginsburgh, 2003; Spence, 1973). Wijnberg (2003) explained in a review on awards that they are so popular because quality is very difficult to ascertain prior to consumption in the cultural industries. That winning awards leads to higher financial success has been shown by many studies (e.g. Anand & Watson;
Deuchert et al., 2005; Gemser et al., 2008; Ginsburgh, 2003; Stockmann, 2013). Similarly there have been studies that showed that reviews have a positive effect on the financial performance of products (e.g. Basuroy, Chatterjee & Ravid, 2003; Berger, Sorensen & Rasmussen, 2010; Bourdieu, 2008; Chevalier & Mayzlin, 2006; Dubois, 2012; Eliashberg & Shugan, 1997; Liu, 2006; Sorensen & Rasmussen, 2004). The expectation is that if the
is high than the financial success during that period will also be high.
H2: A high level of merit recognition has a positive effect on the financial success of artists active on the labor market of the performing arts.
Representation
In the labor market of the performing arts representation by an agency was shown to be an important aspect of the personal reputation of job candidates
(Benhamou, 2000; Benhamou, 2005; Menger, 1999) Studies on other cultural industries have shown that representation by agencies, which can be considered selective matching, is an effective mechanism for building reputation (Dubois, 2012; Menger, 2009). For example, Alper and Wassall (2006) explained that writers with agency representation were more likely to be employed and had a significantly higher income than writers who were not represented. A reason that the reputation of a represented artist on the labor market could be higher than that of non-represented artists is because an agency has invested time and money in the artist and their reputation (Godart & Mears, 2009; Spence, 1973). Dubois (2012) found that a poet usually moves from niche markets to broader markets with a more widely spread renown. This shift to a bigger audience was dependent on the representation of the artist. Within the performing arts one could distinguish two types of representation: casting bureaus and agencies. Dubois (2012) also noted that the labor market and the recruiters pay more attention to the job candidates that are represented and consequently this would results in higher success for these artists. On a labor market where there is shown to be an oversupply of artists
(Benhamou, 2000; Benhamou, 2005; Menger, 1999) it is likely that the artists who are represented dominate that labor market (Godart & Mears, 2009). An extensive survey among artists in Australia by Throsby and Zednik (2010) showed that around 40% have had representation. The expectation is that if the representation of an artist over a certain period is high than the financial success during that period will also be high.
H3: A high level of representation has a positive effect on the financial success of artists active on the labor market of the performing arts.
Employment Accomplishments
The professional experience of workers in the labor market has been shown as one of the main factors of human capital to influence earnings (Mincer, 1958). However a measure for experience would be slightly different in the labor market of the
performing arts because it is a very flexible labor market in which many/most artists have no steady contract (Benhamou, 2000; Benhamou, 2005; Menger, 1999; Throsby & Zednik, 2010). Research has shown that most job opportunities were usually only for a limited time (e.g. a season) and there was an oversupply of artists (Benhamou, 2000; Benhamou, 2005; Menger, 1999). Although Ferris et al. (2003) identified certain work experiences such as promotions and mobility as aspects of the reputation of individuals, keeping a job and growing within a company would not be indicative of a high
reputation in the labor market of the performing arts. In fact the opposite was shown to be true (Benhamou, 2000; Benhamou, 2005; Menger, 1999). Having had many jobs showed recruiters that a job candidate is wanted by others (Godart & Mears, 2009; Rosenbaum, 1989). Therefore the more numerous the job contracts, the higher the reputation (Benhamou, 2005). This could also be considered work experience, which was demonstrated to be a good predictor of financial success for Dutch artists by Rengers (2002). So the number of production participations in a market where there is oversupply showed that a candidate has past accomplishments and was valued by others.
(Akerlof, 1970, p. 500). Akerlof (1970) explained that lemons in a market were those products or services that turned out to be bad quality after purchase. The market mechanisms that resulted from imperfect information prior to purchase lead to market distrust and unwillingness to pay full price. In a labor market certain job candidates could turn out to be a bad decisions after hiring them. When job candidates had big
(Akerlof, 1970; Kugler & Saint-Paul, 2004). The absence of unemployment gaps could be another reason that a high number of jobs would mean a high personal reputation
(Kugler & Saint-Paul, 2004). In the labor markets uncertainty conditions would make recruiters look for the candidates that they expected to be less risky hiring investments (Spence, 1973). Kugler and Saint-Paul (2004) explained that hiring candidates because they had more jobs over a period of time and thus had been employed more was called adverse selection. Having a high level of employment accomplishments would show that a job candidate had a value for other employers and a lower risk of the candidate being a lemon. According to Kugler and Saint-Paul (2004) this would result in recruiters selecting those candidates that had more jobs over a period of time. Therefore the number of jobs in a certain period could have an influence on financial success.
H4: A high level of employments accomplishments has a positive effect on the financial success of artists active on the labor market of the performing arts.
Occupational Focus
Within many theories in the cultural industries there is a prevailing assumption
that guide va
adhering to a certain occupational category and instead practicing in a variety of occupations category spanning has been shown to have a negative effect on the
perceptions of the targete ak (2009)
showed that the expectations of consumers were lower for products, such as films, that spanned divers categories or genres. On the labor market of the film industries Baker and Faulkner (1991) showed that there were benefits for artists who had roles that were focused. Already in 1983 Faulkner and Steiner described the benefits but also the limitations of typecasting. Zuckerman (1999) explained that job candidates risk creating
confusion about their abilities, which could result in less attention from recruiters or not being considered at all. This could be a result from the lower expectations that recruiters have of job candidates that span multiple occupational categories or roles in the labor market of the performing arts. Hiring decisions of recruiters should lead to the candidates for who they have the highest expectations of future performance. These expectations and the corresponding personal reputation have been suggested to be higher for actors that have focused on one working discipline. The reason for this would be that because there are only limited resources that could be invested by job candidates into one or more occupational disciplines, greater diversity would results in lower investments in all (Hsu, 2006). This could signal to recruiters that candidates cannot do any discipline at an acceptable level (Zuckerman et al., 2003). Recruiters would therefore not consider the candidates who have shown a reputation for competences in various categories. The expectation is that job candidates who choose a higher focus in their employment will have more success financially and those that have diversified occupationally will have less financial success.
H5: A high level of occupational focus has a positive effect on the financial success of artists active on the labor market of the performing arts.
Empirical Setting
To answer the research question and test the hypotheses generated in the previous chapter a specific labor market was chosen. This selected empirical setting was the Dutch labor market of the performing arts. Research into the performing arts and the cultural industries as a whole has been rising over the years. It has grown so much that in the last decade some universities (e.g. the University of Amsterdam) have invested in faculties dedicated specifically to this developing field of study. Most researchers considered the paper of Baumol and Bowen from 1966 as the beginning of economic
research in the arts (Throsby, 2006). In 1977 the Journal of Cultural Economics specific to the cultural industries was founded, which was included in the Social Science Citation Index and had an impact factor of 2.22 in 2012.Over the years this journal published several articles specifically about labor markets in the arts. In 2013 Google Scholar cited 21 published articles where the creative or cultural labor market is specifically mentioned.
One of the first researchers to look at the subject of labor markets in the cultural industries in detail was Rendall Filer. He performed an extensive census in 1980 of over thirty-two thousand American artists and a similar sized control group to examine
prevailing preconceptions stated that the labor market of the cultural industries had:
economy; (2) a possibility of very high rewards to a limited number of
participants in the market, thus causing the variance of earnings to be greater for artists than for the general work force; (3) a labor force substantially younger than workers in general; and (4) high rates of labor force turnover, especially exits as young workers transfer from artistic occupations to more stable and financially
that artists would not earn more in a non-creative job (1986).
However, more recent studies on the financial gap between artists and the non-cultural workforce have shown very different results. Research by Menger (1999) showed that artists earned less than workforces in comparable occupations and were therefore less successful financially. It also indicated that the labor market of the cultural industries does have larger income inequality and variability. Many researchers since then have verified the results found by Menger. Alper and Wassal (2006) as well as Abreu, Faggian, Comunian and McCann (2012) found evidence that suggested that there is a persistent
difference between what they call the Bohemian and the non-Bohemian workforces both in wages earned and in employment status. The census performed by Throsby and Zednik in 2010 also showed definite proof that artists earn considerably less than similarly qualified workers in other professions. Even in the Netherlands data from the Central Bureau for Statistics indicated that the labor force of the cultural industries earned less on average in the last ten years (2004-2013).
Besides a gap in financial success research has shown that artists on the labor market of the cultural industries also face a high risk of unemployment (Menger, 1999). In that study he also said that unemployment has been increasing. The census by
Throsby (2010) revealed that 28% of all artists experienced unemployment between 2004 and 2009. For actors specifically this percentage was much higher with half of the
workforce having been unemployed during that time. On average artists were
unemployed for 16 months during the five years that the census data spanned. Actors did have shorter periods of unemployment in comparison with other artists. This finding
could suggest that they engaged in more short- between-jobs
periods. According to a study on the cultural labor market in France and the United Kingdom unemployment was comparable to that of other labor markets (Benhamou, 2005). However, an in-depth longitudinal study of the Dutch labor market of the cultural industries showed a different picture (Rengers, 2002). Thirty percent of graduated artists were unemployed at the time of the first survey in 1997, which was 1,5 years after their graduation. After another 4,5 years this percentage had declined to 11%. At the time of the first and second survey the unemployment rates in the Netherlands overall were 5,5% and 2,6% respectively. These numbers would indicate higher unemployment for those in the cultural industries versus those in other labor markets.
The risk of unemployment and the financial gap with the average workforce would likely result in higher uncertainty for artists entering the labor market of the
cultural industries. Menger (1999) explained this as well by stating the fact that artists in the performing arts, both the performers themselves and the creators, enter the
performing arts labor market under high uncertainty. However, artists seemed not to be deterred by this uncertainty. Several different studies in different countries have all shown the same trend of an increasing workforce in the cultural industries (Alper & Wassal, 2006; Benahmou, 2000; Benahmou, 2005; Menger, 2006). In the Netherlands this trend can also be observed. Data from the Central Bureau for Statistics (CBS) indicated a steady growth of the cultural industries over the last ten years in the
Netherlands and Rengers (2002) stated that this growth could be seen over the last thirty years. Unfortunately for the artists, the amount of available work and the demand for artists did not grow as fast as the workforce expanded (Menger, 2006). Many studies showed that there was in fact an oversupply of artists on most of the labor markets of the cultural industries (Abbing, 2002; Abreu et al., 2012; Menger, 1999; Menger, 2006). Artists could have several motivations for still wanting to enter a labor market where job supply is limited and the demand for artists low.
First there would be the winner-takes-all theory, which poses that those artists that do make it in the market are disproportionately rewarded (Adler, 1985; Adler, 2006; Anand & Watson, 2004; Rosen, 1981). According to Rosen (1981) small differences in talent would lead to great differences in success, both artistic and financial. Adler (1985; 2006) has said that these differences in talent would not even be necessary and that artists reached their successes by self-reinforcing cycles of attention. Because of the oversupply in artistic work, those artists that got a little more attention from some than others would consequently get more attention from more people. Elberse (2008)
corroborated this idea with data, which showed that in the music industry the top 10% of track titles accounted for 78% of all the plays.
According to Benhamou (2005), industries with such high rewards for the winners would attract individuals who are either risk-seeking or have a high tolerance for uncertainty.
group is so uncertain, entry into these fields has many aspects of a lottery in which only a the risks associated with the labor market of the cultural industries and described in the previous paragraph, because they are risk-lovers or because they believe their chances of success to be higher than the actually are (Menger, 2006). Overestimation of one s capabilities and prospects was discussed in a paper by Hayward, Shepherd and Griffin (2006) and this hubris was shown to often result in failure. Towse (2006) explained that especially young entrants in the labor market of the cultural industries were likely to overestimate their talent and therefore unable to form objective expectations about their future financial success. However researchers have asked themselves whether artists really believed they would succeed and should be seen as irrational or if their love for the arts may have been the more important motivator for artists to become and remain active on the labor market of the cultural industries.
The ideology has been around for a very long time and it could explain the intrinsic motivation of artists that drives them to remain active on the labor
bs are of two sorts: Aside from monetary rewards, there are the so-called nonmonetary rewards or
psychic income ; 2006) showed that artists were willing
to accept less financial rewards if they also received non-monetary benefits, such as the artistic freedom. occupational choice and preferences would increase the psychic income of artists (Menger, 2006). Rosen (1986) verified that certain job attributes (e.g. risks of unemployment, but artistic freedom would also be such an attribute)
compensated for the financial variances. According to Menger (2006), this idea could be traced back to Adam Smith The Wealth of Nations.
The census by Throsby and Zednik (2010) supported the idea that artists
remained and advanced in the labor market of the cultural industries for mostly intrinsic motivations. The three most important factors that according to artists resulted in their career advancement were all intrinsic. The reasons that artists felt limited them in working in the arts were all extrinsic. Lack of financial returns, lack of work
opportunities, and lack of time each accounted for around 25% of the inhibiting causes mentioned by artists (Throsby & Zednik, 2010).
Artists have often tried to alleviate the lack of financial returns by holding multiple occupations to fund artistic endeavors. This has been shown to be a very common practice in the cultural industries (Menger, 1999; Menger, 2006; Throsby & Zednik, 2010; Towse 2006). Like Throsby did in many of his papers (e.g. 2001, 2007,
2010), most researchers would principal artistic
occupation, art-related work (e.g. teaching in the arts), and work in the non-arts labor markets. The study by Rengers (2002) showed that in the Netherlands 26% of artists had jobs outside of the cultural sector as well. In Australia actors specifically were shown to have spent the lowest percentage of their time on their principal artistic occupation, i.e. acting (42%), and the highest percentage of their time on non-arts related work
compared to other artists (Throsby & Zednik, 2010). Specifically for the labor market of the performing arts the lack of work available was shown to be overwhelming and a major limitation for the artists active on this market (Throsby, 2007).
Studies by Menger (2006) have shown that short-term contracts and self-employment dominate the labor market of the cultural industries. The jobs that artists could do, especially in the performing arts, were mostly project-based with either a short-term contract or on a freelance basis (Menger, 1999). Abreu et al. (2012) found that
almost two- market have full time paid work, while only 10.7% is self-employed or a freelancer. However, the specific industry of the performing arts has been shown to have a higher percentage of freelancers and self-employed artists than other industries, such as the publishing industries (Benhamou, 2000). Throsby and Zednik (2010) found that almost 75% of artists operate as freelancer or are self-employed. A third study by Alper and Wassal (2006) found that 56% of artists in the United States had a full-time contract in 1999 and that 31.5% was self-employed. These differences in findings were likely a result of different interpretations freelancer, but they might also have varied between countries. However, previous research has made it clear that the labor market of the cultural industries was increasing in flexibility
(Menger, 2006).
In such flexible labor markets objective information about future earnings and the ease of obtaining work is difficult to obtain (Towse, 2006). Because of these and other previously mentioned informational gaps both the job candidates and the recruiters have been taking risks with their hiring decisions (Spence, 1973). Both the theory and practice in this chapter and the literature review have shown clearly that artists and recruiters active on the labor market of the performing arts have been taking a risk. As a result of the uncertainty and risk artists try to bridge this informational gap by
transmitting information on their personal reputation. A
reputation for professionalism and high quality talent/creativity are very important in 878). In these cultural labor markets where there is high
uncertainty and imperfect information the value of reputations would increase (Ebbers & Wijnberg, 2011).
This study has been discussing the cultural industries and its labor market because most of the theories on those topics are relevant to the specific labor market of the performing arts. From this point on this labor market will be the focus of the study.
There are many people active on the labor market of the performing arts, not just actors. In this study a broad outline of the workforce will be taken that will include all artists that are involved with creating a performing arts production. Besides actors this would include: theater and stage directors, producers, managers, sound and light engineers and technicians (Lena & Lindemann, 2014).
Methodology
Participants
The arts alumni from the Amsterdam School of the Arts (AHK) who graduated before 2010 were invited to participate in a survey. A sample of the study programs available was taken. The AHK has forty-one theatre study programs with around a hundred graduates per year. Some programs have more graduates than others. Choosing the sample was decided partly based on the amount of necessary respondents. Also, not all of the study programs were suitable for study. There were also some reasons of convenience, which depended on the willingness to cooperate of the different departments and cluster coordinators. The study programs from which alumni were approached were: Drama & Contemporary Music Theatre, Mime, Production and Stage Management, Scenography, Technical Theatre Arts, and Theatre Directing. All alumni were contacted via email, so sampling depended on the availability of digital contact information. 508 alumni from the six study programs mentioned were reached. Thirty-nine alumni from the AHK filled in the entire survey giving a response rate of 7,5%i.
Procedures
After a meeting with the heads of alumni and communication of the AHK the alumni received an email send by the AHK asking for their participation with a link to the online survey in April. After three weeks, when holidays were over, a first reminder
was sent and after another week the last reminder was sent. The alumni were encouraged to participate by several actions: a personal and personalized approach, which was study program based, a guarantee of privacy of information, a promise of a summery of future findings and results with recommendations on increasing success, and a voucher for the theater to be raffled among participants that finished the entire survey to minimize drop-out rate. The survey used a scaling method with very little open-ended questions.
Depending on answers there were different pathways through the survey. For the full survey see the Appendix. The survey was administered in Dutch because all graduates from the AHK are proficient in this language.
Measures
With a small sample size the power of a statistical test is lower, which means that the risk of Type II errors, i.e. not rejecting a false null hypothesis, is bigger. To detect a small effect in the population the number of respondents needs to be a lot higher than to detect a large effect (Cohen, 1992; Field, 2009). The number of respondents also
depends on the statistical test and the -level (Cohen, 1992). With N = 39 there are several tests that will still provide accurate statistical information as long as the effect size in the population is large (Cohen, 1992). The t-test for example is still valid even for extremely small sample si
sample size and other limitations will be considered further in the discussion. Because of the central limit theorem samples of thirty or more tend to be normally distributed (Field, 2009). This study has a sample of thirty-nine, but testing for normality is still prudent. The Shapiro-Wilk test is the best test for normality in small samples (Razali & Wah, 2011).
Dependent variable.
Financial success was measured by annual gross income and was measured in categorical responses. To increase validity of the measurement, the income that could be specifically attributed to the art performance career was asked separately from income of non-culture related jobs. The Qualtrix output was recoded into six categorical responses:
0, 1-5 000, 5 001-10 000, 10 001-30 000, 30 001-60 000, 60 001 and over. The decision to present categorical responses, rather than an open-ended question was taken because participants are sometimes hesitant to divulge financial information, which could result in a dropout of participants or missing data (McDonald, McQuilken & Katakis, 2004). Participants were notified that answers would remain anonymous, but
four participants did. These missing data were deleted list wise, since with such a small sample pair-wise deletion would decrease the sample size too much. Mean substitution, maximum likelihood and multiple imputations are also not recommended for such small samples (N = 39) where the missing values are >10% of the sample (N = 4). To create a continuous variable the participants were then assigned to the mid-point of the income category they responded (Celeste & Bastos, 2013). The mid-point of the highest and open-ended category (i.e. 60 001 and over) was determined by a formulaii based on the
Pareto Curve (Celeste & Bastos, 2013; Parker & Fenwick, 1983). The mid points were 0, 2 500, 20 000, 45 000 and 101 112. Unfortunately review of the Shapiro-Wilk test for normality (SW = 0.799, df = 35, p = 0.000), and the skewness (1.535, SE = 0.398) and kurtois (2.841, SE = 0.778), as well as the histogram and the Q-Q plot, all suggested that the data was initially not normally distributed. To improve the normality of the variable a square root transformation was used (Freeman & Tukey, 1950; Osborne, 2002). This transformation worked best with the given data and review of the histogram and the
Q-Q plot revealed the data to be normal after the transformation. Both the skewness (-0.004, SE = 0.398) and the kurtois (-0.575, SE = 0.778) were greatly reduced.
Independent variables.
Figure 1: Measures for hypothesis 1
To test the first hypothesis, which is modeled in Figure 1, a measure for personal reputation as a whole was used. This measure resulted in a self-reported value for
personal reputation. To test hypotheses 2 to 5, for which a model is shown in Figure 2, four dimensions of personal reputation were measured. Three of the four dimensions were measured first as a yes or no question and then, if yes, as count data representing the amount over the last three years. Depending on the cut-off point for the data they were divided into a high or low level per dimension. If the
four dimensions the logic of the survey made that the answer was in fact zero.
Figure 2: Measures for hypotheses 2-5
Personal reputation.
Hochwarter et al. (2007) developed and validated a 12-item scale that could measure personal reputation. The measured reputation was shown to be consistent
between a self-reported scale and the measure of reputation perceived by others. The
twelve items were translated in rded
(Hall, Zinko, Perryman, & Ferris, 2009). Responses to each item were measured on a Likert scale and ranged from 1 (Strongly disagree, Zeer oneens) to 5 (Strongly agree, Zeer eens). There were no reverse coded items in the scale. The survey forced responses to all measures of personal reputation. So there was no missing data for the self-reported scale. The Cronbach's alpha revealed that the scale for personal reputation of the alumni was reliable (
taking the mean of the twelve items and ranged from four to seven (N = 39).
Merit recognition.
Merit recognition was measured by asking respondents whether they had ever received recognition for their work in the form of awards or reviews. Awards and
(Gemser et al., 2008). If respondents indicated they had ever received awards and/or reviews they then were asked how many of each in the last three years (2010-2013). Responses for the number of awards ranged from 0 to 2 and for the number reviews from 0 to 2 000. Seven of the respondents received awards in the last three years.
Twenty-five respondents received at least one review. Both positive and negative reviews were included in the number because even negative reviews have been shown to result in financial success and the amount of reviews was shown to be more important than the valence of the review (Berger et al., 2010; Liu, 2006; Sorensen & Rasmussen, 2004).
From the total number of awards and of reviews a distinction was made between respondents with a low merit recognition score and those with a high merit recognition score. Respondents who had received no awards and less than three reviews were
assigned a low merit recognition score (N = 19). Respondents who had received at least one award and/or three or more reviews were assigned a high merit recognition score (N = 20). The cut-off point of three reviews was chosen because it was the median in the sample.
Representation.
Dubois (2012) noted that representation by agencies with higher reputations should garner a higher reputation for the artist, i.e. representation by an agent, who invests more time and money in that artist (Spence, 1973), should grant the artist with a higher personal reputation than representation by a casting agency that invests less. However, since the labor market of the performing arts has many unrepresented artists, representation in itself indicates a high reputation (Benhamou, 2000; Benhamou, 2005; Dubois, 2012; Menger, 1999). The measure for reputation was therefore whether a respondent had been represented by an agent or by a casting bureau in the last three years (2010-2013). In the sample of this study only fourteen out of thirty-nine
respondents were represented by either a casting bureau or agency in the last three years and received a high overall representation score. Respondents who were never
represented by either were assigned a low representation score, this was for 64% of the artists.
Employment accomplishments.
To measure the third dimension of reputation, employment accomplishments, the respondents were asked if they had participated in various types of productions and if so how many over the last 3 years (2010-2013). Theater, television, movie, dance and digital media productions were all taken into consideration. When all types of
productions were added up respondents participated in between 0 and 120 productions. Respondents were then divided into high (N = 20) and low (N = 19) employment
accomplishment groups. A cut-off point of twelve productions was chosen because it was the median in the sample.
Occupational focus.
The diversity of the artistic career of the respondents is measured by asking them whether they focus on a single discipline or career or if they have a broader view,
focusing on multiple disciplines or careers. An example related to their study program iven to illustrate the question. 66.6% of respondents (N = 26) had a diversified occupational focus and 33.3% (N = 13) was focused on a single discipline.
Control variables.
In this study four control variables were included: gender, years since graduation, nominal wage increase, and self-reported artistic success. This study controlled for these variables because financial success could be influenced by them.
Gender.
Respondents that were female were coded 0; those that were male were coded 1. Eighteen respondents were female, 46%, and twenty-one were male, 54%.
Years since graduation.
The graduation year of alumni was asked with a drop-down response option. Responses ranged from 2010 to 1970. The responses were reported as the number of years since graduation, i.e. an alumnus who graduated in 2004 was reported as having ten years since graduation. The graduation year was not normally distributed, with skewness of 2.14 (SE = 0.38) and kurtosis 4.79 (SE = 0.74).
Self-reported artistic quality.
Because the validity of any measure of artistic quality is tenuous at best, a self-reported measure was chosen as the best option for controlling for this variable.
Respondents were asked how satisfied they were with the artistic quality of their careers. Responses were measured on a Likert scale and ranged from 1 (Not at all satisfied, Zeer ontevreden) to 5 (Extremely satisfied, Zeer tevreden). Self-reported artistic quality had skewness of -0.31 (SE = 0.38) and kurtosis -0.63 (SE = 0.74).
Results
Most artists have an annual gross income between ten and thirty thousand euros that can specifically be attributed to their art performance career. There are eight artists who do not earn an income that can be credited to their art performance career. Most of these artists earn an income by working in culture-related or non-culture related jobs. Although all artists are, by own admission, active on the labor market of the performing arts, only 42% of them work exclusively in the performing arts, while the other 58% indicate to also work in culture-related jobs or entirely uncultured jobs. Only 21% of the artists have a fixed contract. The mean and standard deviation of the financial success of artists active on the labor market in the performing arts can be found in Table 1. In this table there are also the means and standard deviations of all the other variables.
The personal reputation mean and standard deviation of the alumni of the AHK is significantly different from the values found by Hochwarter et al. (2007) in their study. They found a mean of 5.92 (SD = 0.81), but a t-test showed that the mean found by this study is significantly lower, t(38) = -5.234, p = < .001. Besides the mean and standard deviation of personal reputation, the entire correlation matrix between all variables can be found in Table 1.
There are five significant moderate correlations between the variables. Personal reputation scores are negatively correlated with representation and the number of years since graduation. Representation and employment accomplishments have positive correlations with merit recognition. Lastly, financial success has a positive correlation with gender.
To start exploring the expectations established by the hypotheses in the literature review, four independent samples t-tests were performed. These indicate the differences in financial success between the high and low levels on each dimension of personal reputations. Table 2 shows a summary of all results on the t-tests. Only those with a high occupational focus level have significantly higher financial success. However, to test the effect weight and effect direction of each dimension a regression analysis is needed.
To examine the effect of personal reputation and its dimensions on financial success a multiple hierarchical regression analysis was executed. For an overview of the results see Table 3. The first model contains just the control variables and accounts for 26% of the variance in financial success. In this model gender has a significant effect weight, but the number of years since graduation and the artistic quality do not. The model that includes the self-reported measure of personal reputation does not explain any more of the variance. The third model, which includes the four dimensions of personal reputation, does explain more of the variance. This model explains 51% of the variance in financial success and is significantly better than the first two models. In model 3 the weight of the gender factor has increased and occupational focus and
representation also have significant positive weights. Including the interaction effects in a fourth model did not significantly increase the variance explained. There are no
fourth model obviously does have multicolliniarity issues because of the interaction variables that are included in the model.
2
8
Table 1
Means, Standard Deviations, and Intercorrelations Among Study Variables
Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1. Gender (N = 39) 0.54 0.51 2. Alumni Years (N = 39) 12.21 9.17 0.15 3. Artistic Quality (N = 39) 3.56 0.91 -0.05 0.04 4. Personal Reputation (N = 39) 5.27 0.77 0.03 -0.38 * 0.10 5. Merit Recognition (N = 39) 0.51 0.51 0.13 0.12 -0.13 -0.24 6. Representation (N = 39) 0.36 0.49 0.05 0.22 0.13 -0.34 * 0.41 ** 7. Employment Accomplishment (N = 39) 0.51 0.51 0.23 -0.04 0.04 -0.20 0.38 * 0.20 8. Occupational Focus (N = 39) 0.33 0.48 -0.11 -0.06 0.04 0.19 -0.07 -0.08 -0.07 9. Financial Success (N = 35) 130.06 90.78 0.46 ** -0.09 0.20 0.09 -0.14 0.14 -0.11 0.32 *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 Table 2
T-Test Results of Personal Reputation Dimensions on Financial Success
Outcome Group 95% CI for Mean Difference
Low level High level
M SD N M SD N t df 5. Merit Recognition 143 100.8 17 118 81.2 18 -37.2 88.3 0.83 33 6. Representation 120 99.5 22 147 74.6 13 -86.7 34.2 -0.89 31 7. Employment Accomplishment 139 96.2 18 120 86.5 17 -44.3 81.8 0.61 33 8. Occupational Focus 111 89.3 24 172 83.1 11 -125.6 3.9 -1.91+ 33 +p < 0.1
2
9
Table 3
Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Financial Success (N = 35)
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
Variable B SE B B SE B B SE B B SE B Constant 35.32 60.50 20.93 129.56 -20.34 141.87 19.79 183.65 1. Gender 81.99 27.88 0.46 ** 82.12 28.35 0.46 ** 108.46 26.11 0.60 ** 119.01 27.67 0.66 ** 2. Alumni Years -1.58 1.84 -0.13 -1.44 2.17 -0.12 -0.40 2.19 -0.03 1.46 2.54 0.12 3. Artistic Quality 19.11 15.46 0.19 18.56 16.30 0.19 6.42 15.99 0.07 -1.95 17.16 -0.02 4. Personal Reputation 2.77 21.90 0.02 9.53 23.55 0.08 4.20 31.50 0.04 5. Merit Recognition -16.18 29.35 -0.09 -488.24 284.26 -2.73 + 6. Representation 55.72 30.73 0.30 + -192.85 248.60 -1.04 7. Employment Accomplishment -32.12 29.63 -0.18 512.63 262.66 2.86 * 8. Occupational Focus 81.93 30.43 0.43 * 205.33 253.10 1.07 Interaction 4×5 81.13 51.60 2.33 Interaction 4×6 46.31 49.49 1.25 Interaction 4×7 -94.92 46.55 -2.77 + Interaction 4×8 -20.77 44.85 -0.60 R2 .26 .26 .51 .60 F for change in R2 3.58 * 0.02 3.28 * 1.21 p for change in R2 .03 .90 .03 .34 +p < 0.1, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01
Because model 2 is not significant there is no support for the expectation that a higher self-reported personal reputation has a positive effect on the financial success of artist active on the labor market of the performing arts. Therefore the null-hypothesis that higher self-reported personal reputation has no effect on the financial success cannot be rejected. After this study there is no credible evidence to support for hypothesis 1. Model 3 is the best fit to explain the variance in the financial success of artists active on the labor market of the performing arts. The findings on the different significance and weights for the four dimensions of personal reputations lend support to hypotheses 3 and 5, which hypothesize that representation and occupational focus have a positive effect on financial success. However, the null-hypotheses linked to hypotheses 2 and 4 cannot be rejected. There is no convincing evidence that suggests that merit recognition or employments accomplishments have any influence on the financial success of artists.
Discussion
Review of the literature shows that heterogeneity in the labor market of the arts is not uncommon (Benhamou, 2005). Both Rosen (1981) and Adler (1985; 2006) have studied the considerable differences in success when compared to little or no differences in talent. This probably explains why financial success did initially not adhere to
normality expectations. The fact that there was a positive skewness indicates that incomes are skewed towards the lower end of the income spectrum.
The median salary of artists in the United Kingdom, which was verified by Abreu et al. in 2012, is about 22 200 euros converted from pound sterling by the exchange rate at that time. This is similar to the median, 20 000, for annual gross income found in this study. As expected, it is also a lot lower than the income of alumni who are not
active in the cultural industries and earn around 27 125 euros a year (Abreu et al., 2012) This is in line with previous research by both Benhamou (2000; 2005) and Alper and Wassall (2006) and data from the Central Bureau of Statistics in the Netherlands. Their research shows that artists can earn more if they work outside of the arts than their colleagues in the cultural industries do. The findings of this study do not align with because in this study a distinction was made between income that could be specifically attributed to the art performance career and income from arts-related work or non-culture related jobs. Filer (1986) did not make this distinction in the sources of income of artists.
This study found a rather high percentage of freelancers, 45%, and a much lower percentage of artists with a full time contract, 21%. This is especially true when these values are compared to the study by Abreu et al. (2012). The difference in the amount freelancers may be because Abreu et al. looked at the entire cultural industries not just the performing arts. The percentages found in this study are more in accordance with the values found by Throsby and Zednik (2010). For actors specifically, they found that 43% of them were self-employed or freelancers. Rengers (2002) made a compelling argument that stated that perhaps there should be a division between two distinct labor markets; a distinction that would be based on the nature of the artwork. Those artists that create art
in the performing arts this might be a play writer more often generate an original work of art. The performers in the performing arts this might be an actor then (re-) interpret the original artwork and deliver it to an audience. Compiled data showed that the creators are more often self-employed, while the performers more often have short- or long-term contracts. The labor market of the two also differs on both hours worked as well as wages. Unfortunately, this study did not separate these two forms of art labor and can therefore not give any insights into this issue.
A deviation from previous research is the mean found for personal reputation in this study and that of Hochwarter et al. (2007). The difference is significant, but not entirely unexpected because the samples used for both measurements are not very similar. Hochwarter et al. (2007) studied undergraduate military candidates at a large university in the southeastern United States. This, one can easily argue, is not a
comparable sample to the alumni from the AHK, who are active on the labor market of the performing arts.
A more surprising finding about personal reputations is the negative correlation with the number of years since graduation. Previous research makes one expect that personal reputations grow over time and are therefore positively correlated with the time since graduation (Bromley, 2001; Ferris et al., 2003), but the results show that the
opposite is true. This might be because of reputational decay (Herbig & Milewicz, 1997; Theus, 1993). This decay could account for a decrease in the accuracy of reputations when there is much time between jobs (Herbig & Milewicz, 1997). This reputational decay may occur when expectations are not fulfilled or when adaptation to a changing environment is slow (Theus, 1993). A second possible explanation is that when artists are younger and have graduated more recently they have a higher tendency to overestimate themselves and their talent and have more difficulty estimating their chances for success
(Towse, 2006). father of modern economics
professed that:
The contempt of risk and the presumptuous hope of success are in no period of life more active than at the age at which young people choose their professions. How little the fear of misfortune is then capable of balancing the hope of good luck appears still more evidently in the readiness of people to enter into what are
Younger artists who just entered the labor market are more prone to
overestimation (Hayward et al., 2006). This could lead tot the results found in this study where personal reputations are not increasing over time but decreasing.
Personal reputations are also negatively correlated with representation, which is a curious finding and therefore noteworthy. One would expect to find a positive
correlation here, because agents and casting bureaus want to represent those artists that have good personal reputations. A possible explanation might be that those who have a high personal reputation, or perceive themselves to have a high reputation, are more likely to find employment on their own without help from an agency or bureau. Three-quarters of all artists state that they see themselves as the most important promoter for their work (Throsby & Zednik, 2010). The added reputational effects of being associated with a certain bureau or agency may seem less necessary to those artists who perceive themselves to have a high personal reputation. Future research might look into the agent-artist relationship and the mutual benefits that it brings each of them. An
exploratory qualitative study could interview agents, artists with representation and artists without and their motivations. Further research could then link these findings to possible income variance.
Lastly, the significant positive correlation of representation and employment accomplishments with merit recognition seems logical if one considers that these variables give an artist more accomplishments to get recognition for.
Multiple Regression
The regression analyses identified some factors that had a direct influence on the financial success of artists active in the labor market of the performing arts. A conceptual structural equation model that was developed based on the multiple regression analysis
can be observed in Figure 3. The model is based on the third regression analysis model, which will be discussed later in this chapter.
Figure 3. Conceptual structural equation model including path coefficients.
Note: +p < 0.1, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01
The first regression model explains a quarter of the variance in financial success. Most of the variance can be explained by the gender factor. The standardized coefficient for gender is positive. Because men were coded as 1 this means that being male affects financial success positively. Simply put, men earn more than women in the labor market of the performing arts. That gender inequality is the case in almost any workforce, including that of the arts, is well-established (e.g. Gilder, 2012; Oaxaca, 1973). Throsby and Zednik (2010) found that both the mean and median income of female artists is almost half of that of the male artists. Even in the artist population of the Netherlands, a country that many people would consider non-discriminating, findings suggested that the
effect of gender on earnings was relatively strong (Rengers, 2002). Although financial success has less of a variance than that of the Australians, Dutch female artists still earn almost 30% less than the men. Alper and Wassall (2006) also found that the differences between male and female artists in the United States were considerable.
The study by Throsby and Zednik (2010) has even suggested that the difference in financial success between men and women is particularly large for artists. However, Benhamou (2005) found no such evidence in his study that would suggest a higher gender-discrimination on the ar
markets in the United Kingdom. In this study it was not possible to make comparisons to other labor markets due to both time and magnitude constraints. No significant conclusions can therefore be given on this issue.
The other two control variables do not have a significant effect on the financial success of artists. A positive coefficient weight for the number of years since graduation would have been in line with previous findings. Abreu et al. (2012) found an increase in
-year period. Rengers (2002) also proved that an increase in earnings over the years holds true in the Dutch labor market of the cultural industries. Six years after graduation artists earned significantly more than after only one-and-a-half years. However, this study found no such significant effect, which leads to the question: why not? Perhaps the economic crisis has flattened the income of artists, bringing the different graduation cohorts closer together. Although speculation about the reasons for not finding a significant factor weight is possible, in the end only after a study analyses an artist over the span of their career can one make any significant conclusions on this. Future research could include a longitudinal study on how the number of years since graduation affects the financial success of artists active on the labor market of the performing arts.
The findings with regard to the other control variable, which measured artistic quality, did not show any significant effects either. Most research will confirm that, if measured correctly, quality should have an effect on financial success. Some of the papers that show evidence for and lend support to theories predicting these constructs are linked have been reviewed in chapter 2. If one assumes that these findings are accurate, then the most likely reason for insufficient evidence for the relationship must be that the variable in this study lacks construct validity. This is not particularly surprising because, although it is certainly an interesting construct that could have led to many thought-provoking results, artistic quality is almost impossible to measure objectively. What is artistic success to one person might be seen as commercial entertainment without artistic value to another. The opinions on what constitutes high artistry are wide-ranging and the attitudes towards the quality are even more varied (Arlander, 2011). Unfortunately this study can make few conclusions that would settle this issue one way or the other.
Model 2 of the regression analysis is not significant. Therefore, the findings of this study do not support the notion that higher personal reputations should have an effect on financial success. There are three possible reasons why the results from this study did not show the expected effect. The first possible reason is that there is in fact no effect to measure; that personal reputations have no influence on the financial success of individuals. However, this is unlikely because, as was discussed in detail in chapter 2, previous research has found many results that do support this relationship (Hochwarter et al., 2007; Tsui, 1984; Zinko et al., 2012).
Another cause for the absence of a significant result might be that the effect size is too small to detect with the small sample of this study. With a confidence interval of 95% and a power of .80 large effect sizes can be identified with multiple regression analyses (Cohen, 1992). However, if the effect size is only medium or small the sample
size needs to be larger, viz. an N of 67 and 481 respectively (Cohen, 1992). Therefore, having a sample of only 39 artists does pose a limitation on the likelihood of finding significant relationships when the effect size is .15 or smaller (Cohen, 1992). Future research that wants to study the influence of personal reputations on financial success should increase their sample size considerably. Because the survey used in this study asked at times for in-depth information, it may have been considered too long, which resulted in a high dropout ratio. A shorter and more to-the-point survey might result in a higher response rate and a bigger sample.
The third reason that may cause a lack of support for the hypothesized influence is that the variable for personal reputation does not accurately depict what it is trying to measure. Although the internal reliability of the construct was high, the construct validity does not have to consequently be so as well. It is conceivable that the self-reported measure for personal reputation used in this study is in fact quantifying a different
talent and ability to procure a job. This interpretation is supported to an extent by the findings in this study. As mentioned earlier in this chapter when discussing the negative correlation of personal reputations and the number of years since graduation, younger and more recently graduated artists are more confident in their assessment of their talent and job opportunities (Towse, 2006; Hayward et al., 2006; Smith, 1776). A confidence in their personal reputation might be what is measured, not the objective personal
reputations as other people, including recruiters, would perceive them. It must be noted however, that this explanation of the possible fault in the construct validity does not support the findings of Hochwarter et al. (2007), which demonstrated that the self-reported values for personal reputation were significantly related to the peer self-reported values.
