Innovation and the Success of a summer festival Noorderzon does it differently
University of Groningen
Faculty of management and organization MSc in Business Administration
Strategy and Innovation
Date: 6/11/2006 Version: final Load: 25 credits Author: Wendie van der Schuur
Rembrandt van Rijnstraat 6 9718 PN Groningen 0642289994
W.van.der.Schuur@student.rug.nl Student number: 1518984
1st Supervisor: Drs. Iván Orosa Paleo 2nd Supervisor: Dr. Gerda Gemser
1. INTRODUCTION
According to Getz (1997, p1): “festival events constitute one of the most exciting and fastest growing forms of leisure, business, and tourism related phenomena.” The explosion in festival events can be explained by supply factors, such as cultural planning and tourism development, to demand factors, such as lifestyle sampling, and socialisation needs (Prentice and Andersen 2003).
Due to problems of defining a festival, no precise figures on the number of festivals per year can be given (Frey 2000). However, the conclusion can be drawn that the number of festivals are increasing, since the number of requests for subsidies have increased in the Netherlands. In 2006, 255 festivals requested a subsidy, of which 96 actually received a subsidy from the Foundation Stage Programming and Marketing (which is funded by the government) in the Netherlands. The allotment towards festival subsidies has increased in preceding years: in 2004, 457 675 euros were allocated towards festival subsidies, in 2006 this increased to 1 350 296 euros (FPPM 2006). The summer festival market, which is centralised in this master thesis itself, is also developing: the amount of summer festivals is increasing (Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004) and the Foundation Stage Programming and Marketing stated that in 2006 they received 50% more requests for summer festivals.
In the Netherlands the concept of summer festivals originated over thirty years ago. The goal was to get stage performances out of the internally focused theatres and to bring them out on the street; the majority of the summer festivals do not take place in regular theatres. Basically all summer festivals take place at one location and last around ten days. Generally, summer festivals strive to program high quality - programs which are experimental. Additional to theatre, dance and music are also programmed and mainly all festivals offer a specific youth program. Finally, some festivals do have a specialisation (theatre or cross over) or a theme (Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004).
This study has been performed in co-operation with the management of Noorderzon, an annual summer festival located in Groningen. Noorderzon held its 16th edition in 2006. Since 2001, Noorderzon has adopted a new course. A new artistic director, Mark Yeoman, has been employed, and the decision was made to focus on interdisciplinary work. Since that moment, the program has had a stronger focus on new, experimental and innovative work. After six editions in this new form, the Noorderzon management want to know which kind of audience attend the Noorderzon festival and if the audience is satisfied with the (innovative) products of Noorderzon. Additionally, the Noorderzon management likes to know whether the innovative character of the festival has an influence on the satisfaction and loyalty of the attendees.
In this master thesis one possible determinant of summer festival success is examined in-depth, namely non-technical innovation.
The core research question of this report is: Does non-technical innovation determine the success of a summer festival?
The festival’s success is defined by the customer satisfaction and the customer loyalty. However, not only the customer perspective is taken into account, the occupancy rate of the festival and the total amount of festival attendees are also related to success.
Innovation is the creation of development and implementation of a new product, service, manufacturing and managerial process or the design of an organization with the aim to improve efficiency, effectiveness or competitive advantage (e.g. Schumpeter 1934, Tidd et al 2005) and which is valued by its selection system (Wijnberg 2004). Non-technical innovation relates to elements as style, the development of new concepts, or the introduction of new organisation formulas (Jacobs 2005). Non-technical innovation related to the motivation factors of the Noorderzon attendees. These factors are divided in: curiosity, reputation and event novelty. Curiosity is finding out that someone wants to learn something new, something to explore. Perceived reputation is about how the festival is seen through the eyes of the attendee. Perceived event novelty is about the expected experimentation of the festival and its performances. It is assumed that innovative organisations like Noorderzon encourage these three motivation factors, and that more people are stimulated by these motives. Additionally, it is assumed that these people are more satisfied and loyal because these people understand the Noorderzon concept.
The research question will be answered by performing a literature study and a case study of the Noorderzon festival. The Noorderzon festival is a summer festival, a theatre and crossover festival, for international arts, located at the Noorderplantsoen (Public Park) in Groningen. Noorderzon uses and co- operates with several locations in the city centre like existing theatres and production houses, like the Grand Theatre (Eerland and Yeoman 2004). These co-operations express themselves in the DownTown platform: all performances that are co-operations but are not performed in the Public Park, but on the other locations, such as a movie theatre or a theatre, are called DownTown. Years ago, Noorderzon started with two small tents in the Public Park and since then it has expanded to an eleven days comprehensive event with outside performances, music, circus and a strong social basis. All with the philosophy: coming together after the summer holiday to open the new school/work year (Noorderzon 2006). The focus of the programming is interdisciplinary theatre with emphasis on unknown actual international offer and an accent on work from the Northern of the Netherlands. To quote Mark Yeoman (artistic director): “It is about experimenting: trying and adding new things.” (Eerland and Yeoman 2004).
Noorderzon works according to the following formula: 60% international artists/ 30% local artists/ 25%
free of charge. The programming is focused on new and innovative work (Noorderzon 2006).
Noorderzon strives to reach a broad diverse audience by their (accessible) character, uniqueness and the quality of the performances (Eerland and Yeoman 2004).
The outline of the master thesis is as follows: it starts with a review of the literature on festivals and innovation. First the definition of festival is introduced, including its functions. Then, a definition of non- technical innovation is introduced. Then the motivation factors of the audience are centralised, with an
emphasis on innovation. Finally the success factors of festivals are explained, again with an emphasis on innovation. In the method section, the survey instrument, the data collection and the analysis are discussed. The results and discussion section show the answer on the research question. Finally, in the conclusion section, the strengths and weaknesses, and the theoretical and practical implications are highlighted.
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Studies about festivals are mainly focused on the economic impact of a festival on the host city and region (e.g. Getz 1991, Hall 1992, Mules and Faulkner 1996, Raj 2003, McDonnel et al. 1999, Dwyer et al. 2000).
With the exception of a few studies on local music and theatre performances, little is known about what motivates customers to attend performances. The current services marketing literature provides limited insight into customers’ behaviour, expectations and attitudes regarding various types of live performances and the factors and conditions that impact customers’ satisfaction with these entertainment products (Oakes 2003). With regard to summer festivals, even less has been written.
This can be seen as a great deficiency: Crompton and McKay (1997) cited three interrelated reasons why research on event motivation is important: it is a key to designing better products and services, it is closely linked to satisfaction, and it is a crucial ingredient in understanding the attendees’ decision-making process. These factors are even more important as the growing number and diversity of events lead to more intense competition.
2.1 Festival
Goldblatt (2002, p1) introduces festival events as a kaleidoscope of planned culture, sport, political, and business occasions: from mega-events like Olympics and World fairs to community festivals; from programs of events at parks and attractions, to attends by dignitaries and intergovernmental assembles;
from small meetings and parties, to huge conventions and competitions. According to Getz (1997) a festival is a “public themed celebration”. Festivals concentrate on a number of activities around a specific theme within a finite time frame, thereby creating a critical mass of experiences that may appeal to tourists (Saleh and Ryan 1993). It is a collective event in which ritual, celebratory and experience elements converge in order to provide the audiences with entertainment and knowledge (Orosa and Wijnberg 2005). The numbers of artists perform according to a specific programme or line-up. Festivals usually have fixed dates and times, are of short duration, and occur infrequently, usually in summer.
In this master thesis, the definition of Janiskee (1980:97) is used: “Festivals are formal periods or programs of pleasurable activities, entertainment, or events having a festive character and publicly celebrating some concept, happening or fact”. Due to the fact that our case study is focused on Noorderzon, a cross over summer festival, and thus not focused on one type of cultural activity (e.g.
music, theatre, circus and dance) the definition of Janiskee is used in this article: all cultural activities are included in this definition. This definition is a broad definition with the centre of attention on the festive
character of the festival, a very important characteristic of summer festivals (Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004).
2.2 Functions of a Festival
Festivals have several functions. These functions vary from being an intermediary between producer and end-customer to the catalyst function with regards to tourism. However, festivals not only have economic functions; a social place, a multi-cultural display and opportunities for talent are also important functions.
Important economic and non-economic functions of festivals are summarized in Table 1.
(Insert Table 1 here)
Festivals have economic functions. For instance, festivals are seen as image-makers for the host city, creating a profile for these host cities, positioning them in the market and providing a competitive marketing advantage (Getz 1997, Festivalbeleid Amsterdam 2003, Hall 1992, Mules and Faulkner 1996, Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004). Additionally, festivals create employment directly related to festivals, but also as a consequence of an improved economic situation (e.g. McIntyre 2003, Dwyer et al. 2000, Goldblatt 1997). Additionally, infrastructure development is related to festivals (Evans 1995, Hughes 1993).
Another economic role of festivals is to act as catalysts for attracting tourists (e.g. Getz 1989, McDonnel et al. 1999, Hall 1989 Dwyer et al. 2000). According to McDonnell, Allen and O’Toole (1999), tourism related services, which include travel, accommodation, restaurants and shopping are the major beneficiaries of an event.
On the other hand, festivals influence the commercial performance of the artists (Caves 2000, Hirsch 2000) and give a signal to other actors in the market (e.g. Orosa and Wijnberg 2005, Derksen 2001).
Specifically, festivals are intermediaries between the producers of live performances and final customers:
the festival organisation makes a selection out of all the artists (e.g. Orosa and Wijnberg 2005, Derksen 2001). Furthermore, festivals have a distributor and retailer function of individual goods (e.g. Orosa and Wijnberg 2005).
Furthermore, festivals are narrowly related to innovativeness (Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004); festivals can act as a platform for, for instance, new acts, groups, combinations and settings. Festivals provide performance opportunities for talent (e.g. McIntyre 2003). The largest “breeding places” of new and exciting theatre are the small scale summer festivals (Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004). Something that starts at the “Festival aan de Werf”, “Oerol” or “de Parade” has proven to be good enough to go on tour (Van der Jagt 2003). Festivals provide benefits in the form of creative focus (ABS 2002).
Finally, summer festivals stimulate the interest of attendees in other cultural activities, for instance it stimulates theatre attendance (Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004).
Festivals also have non-economic functions. Community members may not view the festival as a money- making tourist attraction, but rather as an enjoyable community-based event, which is a showcase of the
host city’s rich intangible heritage, local traditions, ethnic backgrounds and cultural landscapes (Copley &
Robson 1996, Douglas et al. 2001, UNESCO 2004). Moreover, festivals generate community pride:
festivals are popular because of the ‘pride of place’ phenomenon (Janiskee 1996, Hill 1988, ABS 2002, Long and Owen 2006).
Moreover, festivals offer an experience: live performances can provide audiences with visual surprise and a sense of dramatic spectacle (Earl 2001). Festivals also act as a social place: it creates a place where people come together to have a nice time (Raj 2003, Earl 2001, Janiskee 1991, Long and Owen 2006). In addition, festivals encourage social co-operation and voluntary activity (Long and Owen 2006). At these festivals, local residents have the opportunity to take on the parts of either host (festival organizer) or the guest (tourist at the festival) or both (De Bres and Davis 2001).
Finally, a festival functions as a multi cultural display: a festival can be a showcase of ‘tolerance’, and gives the opportunity to learn about other cultures (Douglas et al. 2001).
2.3 Innovation
In a market with a lot of competition it is important to be distinctive. A good way to be distinctive is a progressive attitude: implementing innovations (Tidd et al. 2005). Innovation is about creativity. De Bono (1993) sees creativity as lateral thinking: through patterns. Innovation is the creation of, development and implementation of a new product, service, manufacturing and managerial process or the design of an organisation (e.g. Schumpeter 1934, Wijnberg 2004, Tidd et al. 2005). This newness (Zaltman and Holbek 1984) can be determined on several levels; an activity can be new to the world, to the industry, but it is also possible that an activity already exists for years, although it is new to an organisation. The value of a presented innovation is another essential characteristic. This value can only be determined within the context of a set of selectors’ preferences; market selectors (customers), peer selectors (other producers) and/or expert selectors (Wijnberg 2004). Another characteristic that is important, is that the changes are intentionally implemented and changes that ‘just happened’ are not seen as an innovation. This distinguishes innovation from the more general concept of organisational change.
Implementing innovation is not without risks; acting differently or trying something new means investing in the “unknown”. Therefore it is important to investigate the influence of innovation on the success of an organisation. Given that the concept of innovation is very broad, and the assumption is that technical development is limited, this study is focused on non-technical innovation.
Non-technical innovation relates to elements as style, the developments of new concepts, or the introduction of new organisation formulas (Jacobs 2005). Because this study is focused on festivals, the following statement is very applicable. Sistermans (2005) argues “Technical knowledge is important for services, but non-technical knowledge is the core of service innovations”. With this quote, Sistermans argues that when it is about services, it is about the idea, the concept what makes the difference. Jacobs (2005) argues that once all the products and services have the same quality the customer will choose the most attractive one; non-technical innovation, for instance in the form of design, is becoming more and more important as a distinctive ability of a product or service.
Non-technical innovations at summer festivals are categorized in three categories:
1. Innovations related to the atmosphere, for instance the layout of restaurants, stages and street performers, but also the weather;
2. Innovations related to the performances, for instance unknown artists or new art forms: talents, but also unknown artists for the audience and new art forms. For instance, new genres, new combinations with dance, music, theatre and circus;
3. Innovations related to the concept: the total product: the combinations of locations, atmosphere, performances and co-operation with other organisations.
Before a festival can be determined as a success, the festival has to be worthwhile to attend. However, to determine the quality or value of cultural products prior to or even after consumption tends to be extremely difficult (Wijnberg and Gemser 2000). A live performance is essentially a luxury or discretionary product. It is an indulgence that provides fun and creates fantasies and enjoyment. Every performance is a distinctive combination of playwright, cast presentation (Reddy et al. 1998). Experimental products such as live performances provide rich sensory input and require different measures of customer satisfaction than those developed to measure utilitarian products (Langrehr 1991, Holbrook and Hirschman 1982). To some extent, this is a consequence of unclear and rarely obvious standards. However, it is possible to examine the motivation factors of festival attendees and this is assumed as very useful since it is widely accepted that understanding motivation factors is vital to predict future consumption patterns (e.g. Yuan et al. 2004, Crompton and McKay 1997).
2.4 Success of a Festival: Factors
In order to transform a festival into a successful festival, the role of the audience is very important. The recent growth in event tourism has been accompanied by small but emerging literature on the motivation of event-goers to attend special events (Uysal et al. 1991, Mohr et al. 1993, Crompton and McKay 1997, Formica and Murrmann 1998).
2.4.1 Motivation factors. A motivation factor is an internal factor that arouses, directs and integrates a person’s behaviour (Iso-Ahola 1980). A decision to attend a festival is a directed action which is triggered by a desire to meet a need (Crompton and MacKay 2001). People have different needs which s/he desires to satisfy through a festival need. In Table 2 an overview is given of the motivation factors to why people attend special events and/ or choose holiday destinations.
(Insert Table 2 here)
Motivation factors are examined for many different activities. These motivation factors differ from European summer festivals to motivation factors with regard to the decision making process of a holiday destination to the motivation for attending an air show to the reason why to attend a world music and information culture event. All these studies focus on special events and holiday destinations, adding tourist
motivations to the events is perfect for investigating summer festival attendees since tourist motivations are subject to specific situations and unique settings (Yuan et al. 2004).
Gregariousness is a recurrent motive, and socialisation, family and other, is frequently experienced as a dimension of festival consumption (e.g Earl 2001, Kim et al. 2001, Nicholson and Pearce 2001, Crompton 1979). Crompton and McKay (1997) even made a distinction between known group socialising (group feeling), external interaction/ socialization (making new contacts) and gregariousness (being together with other people). However, the social aspect is not the only motivation factor to attend an “event”. Earl (2001) examined experiences and motivations associated with attending live music performances. He selected motivations varying from curiosity and concert-specific music (e.g. a cunning mix of familiar work with rarely played songs: unique) to living dangerously: the joy of live performances (excitement) and hero worship (physical proximity). Other motivations are opportunities for inhibited forms of behaviour (opportunities for social behaviour that may be precluded in a domestic setting) and finally ritual dimensions (concert rituals provide a coordinating role: “if we know the ritual, we know where we are and can feel comfortable”). This study is focused on live music performances; nevertheless these motivation factors are not only attributed to live musical performances. Curiosity is a very important motivation factor in the comparative study done by Nicholson and Pearce (2001) at two food and beverage festivals, an air show, country and music festival, but curiosity is also an often used motivation factor for research at nine European summer festivals (Gaber 2005). Kim et al. (2001) found out that curiosity is also important with regards to festival/event organisers in Virginia, USA.
Three studies about (summer) festivals (Gaber 2005, Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004, De Groot 2002) about motivation factors of festival attendees also show similarities. Attendees at all three festivals say to attend the festival because of the atmosphere, as well for a sense of freedom: the festival goer can do what they want. They decide what they are going to see and do, for instance going to performances (free/charged), parade or meeting people. Socialisation is also a recurrent motive: being with friends is very important for the audience of the three summer festivals. The fact that the performances are for free is important for the attendees of the summer festivals connected with the Vierde Kwartaal (Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004) and the European summer festivals (Gaber 2005). At the Mundial festival, for almost 3 out of 4 attendees the provided information is important. That is the least important motivation factor: cosiness, music and common interest were important for almost all respondents (90-100%).
Nicholson and Pearce (2001) found out in their study on four different events, varying from wine and food festivals to an air show, that in all cases the dominant reason for attending was directly related to the theme of the event and to the specific activities or attractions on offer. For instance, “To enjoy the food”
and “I enjoy war bird aircraft”. Earl (2001) argues that to the reasons for customers bothering to attend live performances may be very deeply rooted in their personal histories and/ or reflects the social contexts in which they live.
Studies about audience studies towards events or holidays demonstrate that socialisation is a very important motivation factor. However, this is not the only motivation factor, other important factors are curiosity, excitement, novelty, and theme linked motivations and relaxation.
2.4.2 Innovation as motivation factor. Innovation is not directly mentioned as a motivation factor. However, several motivation factors are related to innovation. Four of these factors that are shown in the overview (Table 2) are curiosity, (event) novelty, uniqueness and reputation.
Curiosity is a frequent mentioned motivation factor at live musical performances (Earl 2001), festival and event organisers in Virginia (Kim et al. 2001), two food and beverage festivals, an air show, a country and music festival (Nicholson and Pearce 2001) an at European summer festivals (Gaber 2005). In general, there is a lot of publicity on festivals (Frey 2000); this can be seen as a reason that curiosity is an important motivation factor in the studies cited above. By showing that an event is new and special and worthwhile to attend it will stimulate curiosity and success will be more likely.
Event novelty is the desire to seek out new and different experiences through pleasure travel as motivated by a need to experience thrill, adventure and surprise, and alleviate boredom (Lee and Crompton 1992).
Event novelty is mentioned as a motivation factor in several studies: festival and event organisers in Virginia (Kim et al 2001), two food and beverage festivals, an air show and a country and music festival (Nicholson and Pearce 2001), pleasure vacations (Crompton 1979), the Umbria jazz festival (Formica Uysual 1996) and the Corn Festival (Uysual et al. 1993). Event novelty means that the novelty, the innovative character, encourages people to attend the festival. This assumption matches the one that says that people like surprises and are always looking for something new.
Uniqueness has to do with differentiated power of organisations. Product differentiation and festival content matter for attendees to arts and cultural festivals (Lyon 2006). Uniqueness is less often mentioned, though, Earl (2001) found out that at live musical performances uniqueness is very important and Getz and Cheyne (1997) examined in their study that uniqueness is important. As stated before, differentiated power can originate from innovating (Tidd et al. 2005). When people are attending a festival because of its uniqueness, innovation is involved in their decision making process.
Reputation is the last motivation factor that is linked to innovation. However, the reputation is not just innovative or experimental. The reputation is the general opinion of the audience towards the festival. In other words, the ‘good will’ of the organisation resulting from its past performances (Wwnorton 2006).
This reputation of a festival can be based on, for instance, the character of the festival, the atmosphere, the kind of performances, or the type of attendees that are at the festival. Reputation is mentioned several times during some studies at festivals: two food and beverage festivals, an air show and a country and music festival (Nicholson and Pearce 2001), a case study of the Edinburgh festival (Raj 2004) and arts festivals in Yorkshire (Long and Owen 2006). When a festival reputation attracts a person it means that these persons want to attend the festival because of its reputation.
Thus, curiosity, event novelty, uniqueness and reputation are important motivations that are often mentioned in several motivation studies. This assumes that newness and innovation is motivating people to attend special events.
2.4.3 Success factors. To be a successful organisation, an organisation has to meet the wishes of the customer (Gronroos 1988). Motivation factors why people attend festivals are clarified in the previous section. The next step is to investigate which factors influence the success of a festival.
(Insert Table 3 here)
Success in the festival market depends on several factors. Just a good location or the right artist is not sufficient to create a successful festival. In Table 3 several factors are mentioned that influence the success of cultural and service products.
Success of a festival is partially dependent on the type and number of attendees the festival is able to attract. Arts audience studies in the United States show that attendance at the performing arts is strongly positively associated with income, educational and occupational attainment, and white racial status (Andreasen and Belk 1980). Early exposure during someone’s youth is a major determinant of attendance to art performances: active youth programs, young people’s concerts or plays, in-school programs and youth discounts are effective to let youngsters know about art performances and to inspire them to attend art events (Ryans and Weinberg 1978). A review of 270 public surveys for museums and performing arts found, not surprisingly, that heavy attendees at one live performing art (except theatre) tended to be heavy attendees at other live performing arts (DiMaggio, Useem and Brown 1987).
Other success factors are related to the content and the format of a music festival. Leenders et al. (2005) found that newer Dutch music festivals can achieve good growth in terms of visitor attendance, especially if they have a narrow scope; they also found out that festivals that focus on a broad target group are less successful than niche festivals. Additionally, capacity constraints result in diversity and proper planning and booking the right artists seem to be essential parts of the survival strategies of music festivals (Leenders et al. 2005). Frey and Busenhart (1996) show that, the success of special events and festivals are mainly the result of easy accessibility, exploitation of niches in the market, and the uniqueness of the event. The date that the festival is organised is another aspect that influences success (Leenders et al.
2005). However, not every festival is successful. A key lesson to be successful is not to focus too much on messages and themes and budgets; since budgets (and star line-up and ticket price), theme, and location are largely non significant predictors of success for Dutch music festivals (Leenders et al. 2005).
Other factors are about the service environment and the audience. According to Bitner (1992), servicescapes (the physical background against which the events take place) may be especially important for experiential services, like live performances, where customers are generally required to spend relatively long periods of time in the physical surroundings of the service provider. Bitner (1992) argues that the perceived quality of the servicescape may significantly impact customer satisfaction with the event or activity. Furthermore the perceived satisfaction with the servicescape influences how much time customers are willing to spend in the service facility and their likelihood of consuming the particular service again in the future (Wakefield and Blodgett 1999). Accordingly, it is influencing the customer’s loyalty too. Data about live music performances suggest aspects of staging, decorations and settings were among the most memorable components of recently attended live performances (Minor et al. 2004).
Other customers influence customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction significantly. When customers come in contact with one another as they share the physic environment of a business, their satisfaction of the experience, and thereby of the business itself, is derived at least partially from the quality of the
interactions they have with one other (Martin and Pranter 1989). In particular the audience is an important factor when many different customers share the same service environment. Its size can also have a positive or negative impact on the service experience (Baker 1987).
Finally, critics and subscription guides play a role in the success of a cultural product. Like the critics in the film industry (e.g. Gemser et al. 2005, Basuroy et al. 2003, Baumann 2002), critics play a role in the reception of theatrical events. Critics are opinion leaders in the choice process for artistic goods, and they help determine the success or failure of these offerings (Reddy et al. 1998). As result of a study concerned the role of theatre critics, Boorsma and Van Maanen (2003) found out that a very important information source for the audience is the subscription guide of theatre venues. This is not surprising because a large part of the attendees book their theatre tickets (far) in advance. Thus, the information sources of the company itself appear to have influence on the decision making process. This means that critics (independent information) as well as information sources of the company itself (dependent information) have influence on success. This assumption corresponds with festivals: festivals publish subscription guides with additional information about the performances around one or two months in advance. For a lot of people this is the first contact with the festival, looking at experimental, unknown acts, this is often the only source of information. Thus, dependent information in the form of subscription guides and the theatre’s/ festival’s websites play an important role. However when performances perform several days at the same festivals (what is common at summer festivals) critics are also important, or when performances are already performed on other stages/ festivals.
2.4.4 Innovation as success factor. Organizers may focus on developing a unique experience and develop new formulas to address new tastes in the market; in any case, with regard to music festivals, effective strategies apply to be those that focus in particular on diversification and innovation (Leenders et al. 2005). Innovation became the dominant criterion in arts (Wijnberg and Gemser 2000). In many types of cultural industries, recognition and attribution of value is strongly linked to product differentiation (e.g.
Becker 1982, Heibrun and Gray 1994, Hirsch 1972, Mosetto 1993, Thorsby 1994). One of the means of differentiating cultural products in order to gain market recognition is through use of innovation (Wijnberg and Gemser 2000). In many instances, art which is innovative will only be successful if the innovators that champion it, succeed in changing the ways in which value is determined. This often means changing the selection system itself, or what is called radical innovation (Wijnberg and Gemser 2000). Frey (2000) argues that festivals have substantial possibilities to be artistically innovative and at the same time economically successful. The major reason is that festivals are less bound by restrictions, e.g.
administrative and employment restrictions and attention, than the traditional venues like theatres.
To be successful, festival organizers should engage the audience in the new experience and offer them a memorable event (Pine and Gilmore 1998). Schmitt (1999) explains: “Art festivals in effect commodify and proffer sensory experience as part of a package of strategic experiential modules, including those of sense, feeling, and thinking, acting, and relating.” For example, music, pageantry, dance, and theatre are traditional forms of experimental mixes, as the hallmark of the Edinburgh Festival. Thus, it can be assumed that innovation is a determinant of success.
3. CONCEPTUAL MODEL
A conceptual model is developed to explain and predict the influence of non-technical innovation of the success of a summer festival. In this master thesis, success is defined as customer satisfaction; customer loyalty; occupancy rate of the performances and total amount of festival attendees. As shown in Figure 1, it is expected that the success of a festival can be determined by the motivation factors that are linked to innovation; namely curiosity, reputation and novelty.
Figure 1
Research model: The influence of non-technical innovation on the success of a festival
Since it is assumed that future patterns of customers’ behaviour, and festival attendance, can be predicted by motivation factors it is worthwhile to study curiosity, reputation and novelty on festival success (e.g.
Yuan et al. 2004).
3.1 Curiosity
Curiosity is an object that arouses interest, as being novel or extraordinary. It is the desire to know and learn (Answers 2006). When a festival is known to be different, to be innovative, people are more inspired to attend, because their curiosity attracts them.
3.2 Reputation
Reputation is a fundamental resource for organisations (Heugens et al. 2004). “Well reputed firms have a competitive advantage within their industries, but poorly reputed firms are disadvantaged” (Fombrun and Stanley 1990). Reputation is an important motivation factor, also in the cultural industries: for instance in the movie and theatre industry. Revivals and sequels usually have more chance to be successful than other shows or films (Leenders et al. 2004).
Festival success - Satisfaction - Loyalty
- Occupancy rate of the performances
- Total amount of festival attendees Curiosity
Reputation
Novelty
3.3 Novelty
Event novelty is the desire to seek out new and different experiences through pleasure travel as motivated by a need to experience thrill, adventure and surprise, and alleviate boredom (Lee and Crompton 1992).
Novelty is assumed to be a frequent mentioned motivation factor, as written in the motivation section.
3.4 Success
The festival’s success is defined by the customer satisfaction and the customer loyalty. However, not only the customer’s perspective is taken into account, the occupancy rate of the festival and the total amount of the festival are also related to success.
It is to be expected that non-technical innovation influences the success of a festival positively. The expectation is based on the assumptions that people like to be surprised, that they are always looking for something new. Thus non-technical innovation is operationalized in terms of:
1. A festival evoking curiosity for –potential- attendees;
2. A festival being novel in the perspective of the –potential- attendees;
3. A festival has a reputation as being a highly accessibly cultural event that is always looking for something new and that is very attractive for social reasons with its –potential- attendees.
4. METHODOLOGY
4.1 Survey instrument
A questionnaire has been developed to examine the characteristics and behaviour of attendees attending the 16th edition of the Noorderzon cross over summer festival in Groningen. Four major components are highlighted in this questionnaire; demographic information to create a profile of the attendee, motivation factors and satisfaction factors with regards to the festival and innovation. Information that has been gathered with regard to the profile is age, gender, residence, education level, occupation, amount of visits to Noorderzon, amount of cultural visits and what kind of cultural visits.
One other major component of the survey is to examine attendees’ motivations to participate in the festival. A set of nine questions are extracted from the literature on people’s motivations to attend (summer) festivals ( e.g. Earl 2001, Nicholson and Pearce 2001, Crompton 1979, Crompton and McKay 1997, De Groot 2002, Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004). Three of these nine questions are aimed towards the reasons related to innovation: curiosity, reputation and novelty (the experimental character). Respondents are asked to indicate the importance of the motivators to attend the cross over festival Noorderzon on a seven-point Likert scale where 1 stands for ‘not at all important’ and 7 stands for ‘highly important’.
Additionally, one question is about the information which is decisive for an attendee to attend a performance. Nine reasons are shown, e.g. information from the subscription guide and critics (Boorsma and Van Maanen 2003).
The third major component of the survey is the satisfaction of the attendee. Satisfaction is one of the four components that influence the success of the festival. In this study success is defined as satisfied and loyal attendees. Additionally, the total amount of attendees has been taken into account as well as the occupancy rates of the performances. Satisfaction is determined according to six aspects related to the offer/program: the quality of the performances; the variety of the performances; the price quality relationship of the performances; the innovative character of the festival; the atmosphere and the co- operation with the other cultural institutions. These determinants summarize the Noorderzon experience and are determined in co-operation with the management of Noorderzon. Moreover, studies about satisfaction of (cultural) products use these criteria e.g. the audience study at the summer festival De Karavaan (Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004). Respondents were asked to value the different aspects on a seven point Likert-scale where 1 meant ‘very poor’ and 7 meant ‘very good’. Customer satisfaction was determined as a 5 on the 7 point scale. With regard to the loyalty of the attendees two questions were conducted in the survey. “Do you intend to attend the Noorderzon festival again in the future?” and
“Would you recommend a attend to the Noorderzon festival to friends and/or family?”. These questions could be answered with “Yes”, “No” or “Maybe”. A customer is determined as loyal when people intend to come back during a next edition and they recommend a visit to the Noorderzon to friends and/or family.
With regards to innovation an open question is asked: (Non-technical) Innovation is measured by asking
“Is Noorderzon innovative (renewing)?”. People could answer: “Yes, because…”, “No, because…” or
“No opinion”. This question was chosen because of the Noorderzon management’s interest in what people think is innovative with regards to the Noorderzon festival. It also tells the management about the reputation of the festival. Finally, two questions are asked whether people attend experimental and unknown performances. Questions asked are: “Some performances have a more experimental character than other performances during the Noorderzon festival, which ones do you attend?” and “Some performances you would know, other performances you won’t during the Noorderzon festival, which ones do you attend?”. People could answer: “Experimental/ Unknown performances”, “Non experimental/Known performances”, “Both” or “I don’t attend festivals”. These questions are asked to find out if people have the intention to attend experimental and unknown performances or not.
4.2 Data collection
The first version of the questionnaire was pre-tested by the Noorderzon management, potential attendees and a group of five academics. Based on the results, minor modifications were made to the original instrument to improve clarity. Subsequently, the modified version of the survey instrument was distributed to a random sample drawn from the audience of the 16th edition of the Noorderzon festival (population approximately 100 000), resulting in collecting 381 completed surveys over an eleven-day period (17 August 2006 – 27 August 2006).
During the Noorderzon festival 419 festival attendees were given a questionnaire. 381 out of 419, respondents filled in and returned the questionnaire (response percentage: 91%). The questionnaires were
given to the respondents, so that they could fill it in by themselves. The ‘interviewer’ remained near at hand so that people could always ask questions. Festival attendees were chosen randomly. Because of the difficulty of the questions only people that were 12 years and older participated in this survey.
Participation was on voluntary basis and participation was anonymous. No material incentives or rewards were offered to the participants for their participation in the study.
4.3 Analysis
The multiple regression (enter) analysis is adapted to estimate a linear relationship between success, satisfaction and loyalty, and the selected motivation factors, curiosity, reputation and novelty.
Furthermore, three control variables are added: amount of visits in earlier editions, experimental and non experimental performances and unknown and known performances.
4.3.1 Amount of visits in earlier editions. The attendees are asked how many times they attended the festival before. With regards to satisfaction and loyalty it is expected that the more often they have attended the festival before, the higher the satisfaction and loyalty. This is assumed, because people who attend more frequently know what to expect, and thus there is less chance of a gap between expectations and the actual experience (Gronroos 1988). As described in the introduction section, the strategy of Noorderzon was changed in 2001, therefore in this way, this statement is wrong, however most of the people that attended the festival more than e.g. three times, have probably also done this one of the last five years.
4.3.2 Experimental and non experimental performances. In the questionnaire a question is included whether attendees attend the experimental, the non experimental or both. Six years ago, Noorderzon started a strategy to program more experimental performances. With the aim offering high quality performances that are not performed in the rest of the North of the Netherlands. Experiment and innovation are centralised. It is expected that the more experimental performances, the more satisfied and loyal the attendees become. Noorderzon tries to exceed the expectations of the (potential) attendees with these performances.
4.3.3 Unknown and known performances. The Noorderzon management programs many (30- 40 %) performances that have not performed before in the North of the Netherlands. In this way, Noorderzon always tries to offer something new and to challenge the attendee to choose something different. Noorderzon wants to surprise their attendees. Because Noorderzon has a different offer than the regular theatres and production houses in the area, a lot of performances are unknown by the attendees. In preceding years, no difference in occupancy rate of the performances (known or unknown) became factual. It is expected that the surprise of the newness of the unknown performances scores better with regard to satisfaction and results to more loyal guests.
With this analysis a causal relation is assumed. The success is predicted by three motivation factors and three control variables. Since the enter method is adopted, all given variables are calculated in the
regression analysis. This enter method is chosen because the variables were determined in advance, before the study itself had a clear view about the factors that relate to success.
5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
5.1 Noorderzon Attendees
The socio demographic characteristics of the respondents at the Noorderzon festival are presented in Table 4. Some highlights: more than 60% of the respondents are female; almost 70% of the respondents live in the city Groningen; 80% of the respondents have a high education level. Three of the four respondents have a job; more than 50% attended the festival more than five times. 45% attends cultural activities ten times or more, within a year, in which cinema, theatre and museum are the most popular cultural activities.
(Insert here Table 4)
5.2 Motivation Factors
Determining the motivations of the people attending the Noorderzon festival was the second major component of the survey. A distinction is made between why one attends the festival and why one attends a certain performance.
5.2.1 Festival. Overall, the research determined that respondents were motivated by sociability, relaxation, accessibility, cultural interest and curiosity, as is shown in Table 5.
(Insert Table 5 here)
Sociability and relaxation are the most important motivation factors of the Noorderzon attendees (score:
6,1). This is not new, as written in the motivation section; this is the most frequent motivation for event attendees and tourists (e.g. Earl 2001, Nicholson and Pearce 2001, Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004, Gaber 2004). Accessibility and cultural interests are the third and fourth ranked motivations. The accessible character is typical for summer festivals (Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004). Noorderzon is in this case has no entrance fee or fences that held the ‘experience’ away from the mass public. The Noorderzon audience are mainly coming from the city Groningen (almost 70%). People are coming for a drink, to enjoy the atmosphere, and it seems easier than entering a café. People are not only coming for relaxation or socialization, a large part also finds the cultural aspect important. We can assume that these people come for the performances, which can be seen as the cultural part of the Noorderzon festival. Distinction of the importance of the motivation program can be clarified as: people attend performances, but are not guided by the program. They let themselves be surprised and usually buy tickets for shows only hours in advance.
Additionally, the cultural part is broader than just the performances, for instance the music and street performances. Aspects related to innovation: curiosity, novelty and reputation score between important/
unimportant and moderately important. These scores are ranked lowest of the nine motivation factors.
This can be explained by: Noorderzon attendees are mainly at the festival for relaxation and socialisation,
as is the original idea behind the Noorderzon, to come together to start the new school/ work year, and do not care what kind of program is offered (novelty is mainly associated with the offer), moreover they are always (more that 50% already more than five times) at the Noorderzon festival, and do not think about the image, they are just going because friends are going, and they like the atmosphere. Less curiosity is also explained by a fixed amount of loyal guests that know the Noorderzon concept and are mainly motivated by the social aspects of the festival. The respondents were less motivated by the program and more by the socialisation part.
5.2.2 Performances. Table 6 shows which factors influence the decision making process with regards to performances. Almost 70% of the festival attendees decide which performances to go to based on the description of the performance in the magazine as published by the management of Noorderzon (digital or on paper). 21,3% of the festival attendees are influenced by reviews. Other important things that influence the decision making process are the genre of the performance (49,7%), the reputation of the group/ actors/director (26,8%) and the day/ time of the performances (36,6%).
(Insert Table 6 here)
Towards performances, the subscription guide of the performances was the most popular information source to get information from. Almost 70% of the attendees used it and based their choice on this information. This result corresponds with the findings of Boorsma and van Maanen on selection of theatre shows (2003). Reviews were used by more than 20% of the attendees. This is quite high, because not all the performances were performed more than one day. Some studies show that critics are proof to influence the customer behaviour (e.g. Reddy et al. 1998), on the other hand, other studies, for instance by Eliasberg and Shugan (1997) with their study about the predictive power of critics’ reviews on box-office sales of mainstream Hollywood movies, conclude that critics’ reviews do predict the success of a movie as measured by box-office receipts, but the review does not necessarily have an influence on viewers.
Information that was important to attend the festival was the genre (e.g. dance, music, theatre, circus), for almost 50%. This is the second highest score, which can be explained by the many unknown performances. However, the subscription guide shows in which genre it fits. So people can more easily choose for the performance they like. The reputation of the group/ actors/ director is important for 26,8%. Examples are the Galili dance group or the cabaret artist Bert Visscher which both have good reputations in Groningen. That day/ time of the performance has a high score (36,6%) is related to the fact that many people buy tickets on the day itself, together with the busy schedule of people around 35 (this age dominates the audience).
5.3 Success
Success consists out of four parts: customer satisfaction (Table 7), customer loyalty (Table 8), occupancy of performances (Table 9) and total amounts of festivals goers per edition (Table 9).
5.3.1 Satisfaction. According to six elements related to the product that is offered by Noorderzon, the respondents had to fill in their appreciation on a scale from 1 to7.
(Insert Table 7 here)
The atmosphere has the highest score. This corresponds with other studies at summer festivals (Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004, Gaber 2005, De Groot 2004). During these audience studies the motivation and appreciation towards the atmosphere was high. The quality and the variety of performances almost get the same average score: between moderately good and good. Quality is a main objective of the Noorderzon festival (Eerland and Yeoman 2004) and also really important for their reputation:
Noorderzon strives to be a high qualitative festival. This edition, Noorderzon was focused on the USA. In suggestions that people gave, people were amazed that artists had to come from so far. Their opinion is that the Netherlands have enough good artists. This can be an explanation for the lower result with regard to 2004 (good). Price quality relationships and innovative character is seen as moderately good. People that are attending the festival for a lot of years see a development. The prices are increasing, and they argue that this influences the accessibility and experience this price increase, as it excludes certain target groups. This increase can explain that in 2004 the score was good with regard to the price quality and that it is moderately good during the 16th edition. The innovative character score is not surprising, since innovatively is not something the Noorderzon audience is concerned with based on the findings on the motivations of the Noorderzon audience. The co-operation with other cultural institutions is rated as poor/good. Limited knowledge about these co-operations can be a cause of the low score. Only 19 percent of the respondents actually attended the Down Town program. On the other hand, according to figures of Noorderzon, it is known that the occupancy rates of the Down Town performances are high (80%).
5.3.2 Loyalty. As described earlier, loyalty is examined in the questionnaire. Two questions were related to loyalty. The first is about the intention to come back in a next edition and the second is about whether people would recommend the festivals to others. The results are shown in Table 8.
(Insert Table 8 here)
Almost 85% of the respondents mentioned that they want to come back in a next edition. 14% is in doubt. Less than one percent are not planning to come back. As shown in other studies, summer festivals often have a fixed core of attendees (e.g. Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004). A higher percentage (93,4%) will recommend the Noorderzon festival to friends and/ or family, 5 % is not sure. 1,6% does not intend to recommend it to others. According to the study of Ranshuysen en Jansen (2004) 50% to 89% of summer festival attendees are loyal. European summer festival attendees are less loyal: more than 33% says to be a loyal attendee of a certain festival (Gaber 2005). In case of Noorderzon, 85% has attended another edition before (50% attended the festival more than 5 times). In 2004, the audience could also be characterized as loyal: 40% attended the festival at least 5 times, 48% in 2004 for the second, third, fourth or the fifth time (Hibma 2004).
5.3.3 Occupancy rates and total amount of attendees. To get an overview of how the festival performs in regard to occupancy rates of performances and total amount of festival attendees, the Noorderzon management provides the figures represented in Table 9.
(Insert Table 9)
Over the years, the occupancy rates of the performances increased with 5% to 85%. As can be seen in the table the occupancy rates are quite stable. With regard to the total amount of attendees we see a top in 2003, in 2004 and 2005 the amount was decreased, but stable. In 2006, the amount of people decreased to 100000 people. According to the management of the Noorderzon festival this could be caused by bad weather (Noorderzon 2006). During the entire festival week it rained a lot (an average of 7 millimetre a day) and the temperature was low (the average temperature was 15 degrees)(KNMI 2006).
5.4 Innovation
With regard to innovation, people were not limited by fixed answers. People were directly asked: Is this festival innovative (renewing)? Almost 38 % answered with “Yes”, almost 10 % with “No”. More than 50% had no opinion. This is a high percentage which can be clarified by ‘no idea’ (don’t know what is meant by innovative) , ‘no interest’ (this festival is not about renewing, it is about cosiness, ‘no time/ don’t feel like to fill in open questions’ (I am here to enjoy the festival, not to participate in surveys).
(Insert Table 10 here)
One hundred forty respondents supported their opinion. Arguments of people that think Noorderzon is innovative can be summarized in three categories:
1. Performances: e.g. “Because of the new, unknown, experimental performances”, “Many talents perform during the festival” and “Noorderzon is always surprising”;
2. Concept: e.g. “Not something the same in the neighbourhood”, “Always looking for something new”, “Unique”, “Also experimental with regards to locations and theme”;
3. Atmosphere: e.g. “The open air”, “The layout” and “The feeling”.
People that argue that it is not innovative, gave reasons like: “Same layout every year”; “Some
performances are innovative, but not the entire festival”, “Similar festivals exist”; “It is a summer pub under a cultural umbrella” and “Because the concept is the same every year”.
It is surprising that people do not think about the innovativeness of the festival, especially the Noorderzon strategy is focused on innovation and experiment. People have different interests. However, when people chose yes or no, they gave clear arguments to support their answer.
Additionally, the respondents are asked if they visit experimental and/ or unknown performances. The results are summarized in Table 11.
(Insert Table 11 here)
The results show that a large majority of the respondents visit experimental performances as well as non experimental performances and that a large majority visit unknown as well as known performances.
Moreover, only 5% does not visit experimental and unknown performances.
5.5 Correlation
(Insert Table 12 here)
To study the determinants of success, the correlation matrix is presented first (Table 12). As shown in Table 12, the correlation between curiosity and novelty is strong (r =0,50), which means that when curiosity is an important motivation factor to attend the Noorderzon festival, event novelty is also an important reason, or when people do not base their choice on curiosity, novelty is less important too.
Nevertheless, curiosity and novelty are not the same. Novelty is about the newness/ experimental character of the festival, curiosity is about getting the attention of the festival, however this is not per se related to novelty, e.g. curiosity can involve the theme or one artist. Other correlations are less strong. For instance, curiosity and the program (r = 0,34). This is not extraordinary, since Noorderzon programs lots of new and unknown artists, which commonly stimulate curiosity. This is also a conceivable explanation for the correlation between curiosity and cultural interest. Curiosity and the accessibility (r = 0,38) is also correlated, Noorderzon is known because of its accessibility (Eerland and Yeoman 2004) e.g. because there are not any fences placed around the festival and no entrance fee has to be paid, a reason for this correlation can be that people are going there just to take a look. However, curiosity is related to freedom to combine several activities: the Noorderzon festival does not limit itself by art forms or genres. A lot of things can be “experienced”: for instance street performances, but also large performances or just having a beer. From this it can be concluded that curiosity is a cause for other motivation factors. The motivation factor novelty does have a strong correlation with the reputation of the festival (r = 0,36), this means that when people come to the Noorderzon festival because of its reputation, they also come because of its novelty, the experimental character of the festival. This can mean that a large part of the audience is aware of the innovative image of the Noorderzon festival. However, it is actually distinguishing: the reputation is a total package what the audience is thinking about the festival, novelty only focuses on the innovative part of the festival. Finally, the more attendees attend experimental performances, the more important the motivation factor: novelty is and visa versa, when people attend the Noorderzon festival because of its novelty, they attend the experimental performances more. Experimental performances are (mainly) new, innovative. The correlation between these two factors is 0,23.
Other strong correlations that are not directly linked to innovation but are interesting to mention are shortly summarized: sociability and relaxation (r = 0,46), people that are motivated by relaxation are mainly motivated by sociability, being together and having fun, too. Sociability and accessibility (r = 0,46), because of the high accessibility to attend the festival, it is not difficult to come to the festival. A lot of
attendees are familiar with the festival and know that this is the place to be with other people. Cultural interest and program (r = 0,56) have a strong correlation: when people come for the program they are often interested in the cultural aspects of the festival.
5.6 Regression
In Table 13, the results of the multiple regression analysis are shown, three motivation factors related to innovation: curiosity, reputation and novelty are related to the success of a festival.
(Insert Table 13 here )
The regression results show that all three motivation factors are significant. This means that when someone’s attend the festival is motivated by curiosity, reputation and event novelty that they are more satisfied than when they were not motivated by these motivation factors. More specifically, curiosity and reputation have more influence than event novelty. Additionally, the total amount of visits influences the success significantly. Nevertheless, this is a negative relationship, what means that when people have attended the festival more often, they assess the festival lower, and are less loyal. This is not expected; it is assumed that when people attended the festival more often, they would be more satisfied and loyal, because in previous years they attended the festival and liked it that much to come back again. Moreover, in the last five years, no big changes are implemented. A clarification could be that people knew the festival before the strategy change (before 2001), a time in which prices were significantly lower (+/- 30%
in comparison with 2006). But another clarification could be the high expectations resulted from the last editions. Also the weather could be a cause for this negative relationship, the temperatures were low and it rained the entire festival, which is an important aspect of the atmosphere, could be experienced negatively which could have influenced the satisfaction and loyalty.
(Non) Experimental and (un)known do not have a significant relationship with success. The R² shows the explained variance: 41,5 % of the variance in success is explained by curiosity, reputation and novelty. The p-value related to the F-value is 0,000 which means that this relationship is significant (P<0,01) at a 99%
confidence level.
6. CONCLUSIONS
The aim of this article was to study the influence of non-technical innovation on the success of a festival.
The basic assumption was that non-technical innovation has a positive effect on the success of a festival.
Non-technical innovation is operationalized the motivation factors: curiosity, reputation: a highly accessibly cultural event that is always looking for something new that is very attractive for social reasons and event novelty. When a festival is innovative, like the Noorderzon festival, it is assumed that these motivations, which are related to innovation, are even more important and influence the satisfaction and loyalty of festival attendees more extensively.
This study examined that the Noorderzon attendees are not highly motivated by innovative related motivation factors; these three motivation factors scored important/ unimportant. These factors were the lowest scores of the nine motivation factors. This is striking, because the Noorderzon management has been more focused on experiment and innovation, since the employment of the new artistic director in 2001, “to create a unique position regarding to the existing local offer and an important position towards the national offer” (Eerland and Yoeman 2004). It seems that the Noorderzon attendee is not very interested in innovation, and thus it is remarkable that these perspectives are that diverse.
This study proved that the relationships between the three variables: curiosity, reputation and novelty and success that is measured by satisfaction and loyalty is significant. People who are attending the festival because of curiosity, reputation and novelty, are more satisfied and loyal than others. Curiosity and reputation have a stronger relation than novelty. That these three motivation factors influence success corresponds with what is argued in the introduction. In the introduction we assumed that innovative organisations like Noorderzon encourage these three motivation factors and that more people are triggered by these motives. Furthermore it is assumed that these people are more satisfied and loyal because these people understand the Noorderzon concept.
6.1 Strengths and Weaknesses
Before discussing the theoretical and practical implications of the results, the shortcomings of this study need some attention. First, this is a one case study, namely of the Noorderzon festival. When more festivals are examined, a more realistic view could be created. Secondly, this survey is focused on attendees in the age of 12 years and older: the age of people was estimated, so that under representation is expected under the youngest attendees. For some questions the optimal result needed attendees that were leaving the festival, but this is not the most suitable moment to hand over questionnaires.
Finally, the question towards innovation is assumed to be unclear. A weakness was that the term (non- technical) innovation is not explained in the survey itself, another weakness is that an open question was used, and people that attend a festival do not want to spend much time on the survey. In this study, more than 50% filled in “No opinion”, with more explanation or when it was turned into a multiple choice question, this response could be increased.
Limitations with regard to the literature study are a limited amount of data that is available about summer festivals and limitation with regard to Dutch (summer) festivals. It is not possible to solely draw conclusions from data about summer festivals, since only two studies have focused on summer festivals, of which one has focused on Dutch summer festivals (Ranshuysen and Jansen 2004) and the other has focused on European summer festivals (Gaber 2005). Since this information is not sufficient to draw conclusions from, literature about other live performances and other special events is added. Literature about festivals originated from the Netherlands is scarce, that is the reason why there is chosen to use literature from other countries too. Foreign studies which are used with regard to motivation factors and success factors are shown in detail in the tables in the section literature.
A strength of this study is that these results are not only interesting for Noorderzon, of for summer festivals, but these are broader applicable. What concludes that people who are motivated by curiosity, because of its reputation or because of the innovative character, score higher on satisfaction and loyalty.
These motivation factors say something about the attitude of the Noorderzon attendees: they have an open attitude, because, when people are not open for something new, they will not appreciate or even notice. Other festivals, but also other entertainment activities can implement this strategy by stimulating and challenge potential attendees through openly showing its innovativeness. In this way, attendees will be more satisfied and loyal.
6.2 Theoretical and Practical Implications
Organizers as well as sponsors want to know what features of festivals make them successful. Organizers want to know how to adapt their festivals in such a way that they will be stronger than their competitors in de market, sponsors and subsidy financiers want to know which festivals are there to stay and are able to attract larger audiences over time. The results of this study indicate that when attendees attend a summer festival because of the motivation factors: curiosity, reputation and event novelty, the satisfaction is higher and the attendees are loyal. These three factors are related to innovation. Thus it can be assumed that when organisations are focused on innovation and also show that they are innovative, for instance in the media, (potential) attendees are more curious, and come for the event novelty and because of its reputation. In this way, organizations should innovate, however in this study a lot of people mentioned that they did not have an opinion about the innovativeness, and also the motivation factors related to innovation scored low. However the point is that organisations should realise that when people have an open attitude they are easier to influence. This open attitude can be reached by challenging people by a new format or a new layout. The message of curiosity is created by adopting a new course or sending out that your organisation is different and thus influences the satisfaction and the loyalty of the attendees.
Future research can be focused on how to create curiosity and why people are coming for innovation and how to create an innovative reputation. When this is known, a real cause of satisfaction and loyalty can be determined. By investigating what the core ideas and concepts of the three motivation factors are, a better view can be made on how to improve satisfaction and loyalty. It is interesting to see what is behind the concept of curiosity. What makes people curious, and in what way do people want a new product or experience? Other, interesting matters to research are: A comparative research on summer festivals: What makes one festival more popular than the other and what are the motives of the organisations that organize these festivals? Also, the influence of the direct environment on the summer festival can be researched. For instance, what influence does the open air, nearby noise and other factors have on the experience of a summer festival?
Finally, it is very interesting to continue this study, knowing that innovation is a hot item in recent literature and research and since summer festivals have focused on experiment and innovation. However, it would be more interesting to apply another methodology, doing interviews could give more useful information than information gathered by questionnaires. Preferably, this study makes difference between
people that attend performances and people who do not attend performances. The profile could be centralised. For instance, are there differences with regards to age and or cultural interests? Additionally, with interviews innovation related to festivals could get more attention, and there is a possibility for interrogating. Summarizing, qualitative research; distinction between attendees (attending performances or not) and more attention to innovation.
