Participants' Feedback Report - IETM meeting in Copenhagen - 2012
-
Upload
ietm-international-network-for-contemporary-performing-arts -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Participants' Feedback Report - IETM meeting in Copenhagen - 2012
PARTICIPANTSʼ FEEDBACK REPORT
IETM Spring Plenary meeting in Copenhagen
28 - 31 March 2012
SUMMARY Attendance Statistics General Comments Working sessions Artistic Programme Next meetings
INTERNATIONAL NETWORK FOR CONTEMPORARY PERFORMING ARTS 19 Square Sainctelette 1000 Brussels - Belgium
tel : +32 2 201 09 15 - fax : +32 2 203 02 26 - email : [email protected]
PARTICIPANTS’ FEEDBACK REPORT | IETM Plenary Meeting in Copenhagen, 28 - 31 March 2012 2
Participants IETM Copenhagen
ATTENDANCE STATISTICS 709 participants attended the meeting, coming from 42 different countries. The attendance was the highest in IETM’s 30-year history. The rate of participants coming from the host country of the meeting was quite high: Danish participants (252 people) represented 35,5% of the crowd. The analysis below is based on a response rate to the feedback survey of 21,7%. Half of respondents were first-time attendees.
Denmark
Sweden
Belgium
France
United Kingdom
Germany, Finland
Norway
Australia, Ireland
Spain
Netherlands
Slovenia
Czech Republic
Hungary
Canada
Switzerland, Italy
Croatia, Romania
Austria
Bulgaria, Poland, Serbia, United States
Greece, Lithuania, Slovakia
Iceland
Kosovo, Malta, Russia
Albania, Brasil, Egypt, Georgia, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Portugal, Ukraine, Uzbekistan
252
63
49
47
39
25
18
17
16
15
13
12
11
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1 Albania, Brasil, Egypt, Georgia, Luxembourg
Macedonia, Portugal, Ukraine, Uzbekistan
PARTICIPANTS’ FEEDBACK REPORT | IETM Plenary Meeting in Copenhagen, 28 - 31 March 2012 3
GENERAL COMMENTS
• POSITIVE COMMENTS Many participants stressed the very good atmosphere at the meeting: networking was easy and discussions were very interesting thanks to the diversity of participants’ backgrounds. The majority of participants appreciated the organisation and the venue of the meeting. From the welcome desk to the boat trip, participants underlined the fluid organisation. The venue was unanimously praised: as the vast majority of sessions and performances were held in the same place, it was easier to get organized and there were more networking opportunities. Some also valued the richness of the programme that came from the quality of sessions, speakers and new topics. Some participants appreciated the efforts made by the communication team to provide accurate and complete information as much as possible, notably through the booklet and the adapted schedule for mobile phones.
“I liked the meeting of interesting people from
similar fields, with similar interests, but with diverse opinions and approaches.
All of them together created a very strong and inspirational atmosphere.”
* * *
“I loved the informal tone, and the open-hearted way people were greeted, and
greeted each other.”
* * *
“Everyone I met from the organizing team were
kind, helpful, and professional. A big plus”
* * *
“Dansehallerne is a great venue for a meeting. Most people were at the same place almost all the time. It was easy to mingle and
meet people.”
Meet with old or new international colleagues
Discover Denmark and the Danish performing arts scene
Take part in challenging discussions related to your work, through
debates and working sessions
Present the work of your organisation or one of your
productions
39%
04%
37%
21%
What was your very first reason for attending the IETM Meeting in Copenhagen?
PARTICIPANTS’ FEEDBACK REPORT | IETM Plenary Meeting in Copenhagen, 28 - 31 March 2012 4
• SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS Some participants suggested some concrete actions to facilitate networking, for example by providing meeting rooms, organizing workgroups in smaller groups, more speed-dating, etc.. In addition, the need for better support of new members was pointed out: a guide for first time attendees could be handed out, the welcome meeting for new members could be more thought-out in order to create connections with older members. In terms of communication, information should be sent earlier for participants to get organised better (list of members, hotel, programme, etc.). Moreover, following our question concerning the implementation of an application for mobile phones: it appears that 50% of respondents would be interested in this greener way to inform themselves. Finally, efforts may be made to improve the
registration system that was not very practical this year. A priori, the new website will solve these problems. Small improvements can be made, for example by providing self-service computers, better signage, by choosing a more central location, have more chairs in the meeting rooms, etc.. Finally, some participants would like the meeting to be more bilingual. Some others express the wish to open IETM more and more beyond the borders of Europe (Africa, Asia, etc..)
“More meetings/workshops with a concrete topic - themes that
theatre professionals handle and work with every day”
* * *
“ The artistic programme should contain more diversity (…), more
link with the global theme, be more specific and demanding”
* * *
« I would like the meeting to be
bilingual (French and English) so that non English speakers can have a better understanding.”
* * *
“Registration was a bit difficult for
me, but else everything was superb.”
* * *
“I would like to receive separately the content
programme and the artistic programme through an iCal file
so that I can import it”
PARTICIPANTS’ FEEDBACK REPORT | IETM Plenary Meeting in Copenhagen, 28 - 31 March 2012 5
• BENEFITS OF NETWORKING
Many participants mentioned that these few days in Copenhagen enabled them to engage in a conversation with potential partners or to meet with colleagues with whom they develop an ongoing project (ex: Cultural Network Freelancer). Others used the meeting to schedule new appointments that could lead to collaborations. Some participants also exchanged technical tools and experiences that will help them in their respective organizations. Some participants who were not then members have expressed the wish to continue the experience by joining the network.
“I could test new communication tools with
other colleagues in charge of diffusion and have more technical discussions”
* * *
“Following this meeting, connections I got with
Denmark, Spain, Italy and Wales could offer new
opportunities to the company.”
* * *
“I met all the people I
intended to see, also there were some very nice
surprises - I met people with stories very relevant to my
situation.”
PARTICIPANTS’ FEEDBACK REPORT | IETM Plenary Meeting in Copenhagen, 28 - 31 March 2012 6
WORKING SESSIONS
The working sessions were appreciated overall. The plenary meeting was particularly inspiring for many participants. But while some stress the quality of sessions and speakers, others pointed out the lack of preparation of some working groups, the gap between the sessions’ description and the content and they especially outlined that they would have wished the discussions to be more focused. Indeed, even though the topics were interesting, discussions did not go far enough and were sometimes too simplistic or too informative. Some add that the moderators should be more active in order not to digress and to further involve the audience in the debate.
10%
51%
31%
03%
06%
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Poor
I did not attend
How do you rate the content sessions generally speaking?
“ I was impressed by the
charisma of the speakers at the plenary meeting, they are really
fascinating people...”
* * *
“I learned a lot on subjects, and saw a lot of completely different
points of view.”
* * *
“Politically interesting”
* * *
“There should be more attention to the
moderation of the talks... The communication was
often just in one way, with no real debate nor
discussion”
PARTICIPANTS’ FEEDBACK REPORT | IETM Plenary Meeting in Copenhagen, 28 - 31 March 2012 7
02%
14%
02% 02% 02% 04%
02% 02%
12%
08% 08%
12%
08% 08%
02%
12%
02% 00%
12%
15%
19% 22%
41%
09%
04%
14%
06%
02%
18%
06% 09%
02%
06% 07%
14%
07% 05%
04% 05%
08%
00%
05%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
NE
WS
RO
UN
D 1
&2
PLE
NIE
RE
- D
roits
et r
espo
nsab
ilité
s –
droi
t ?
GR
OU
PE
DE
RE
UN
ION
- A
rtivi
sme
– É
leve
z la
vo
ix
GR
OU
PE
DE
RE
UN
ION
- D
ével
oppe
men
t du
publ
ic d
ans
les
com
mun
auté
s
GR
OU
PE
DE
RE
UN
ION
- R
epen
ser l
es fe
stiv
als
GR
OU
PE
DE
TR
AVA
IL -
Arts
et D
roits
de
l’Hom
me
GR
OU
PE
DE
TR
AVA
IL -
Rep
arto
ns à
zér
o : e
n qu
ête
du m
odèl
e in
édit
GR
OU
PE
DE
TR
AVA
IL -
Tris
tes
mes
sage
s de
B
udap
est
L'A
RT
SO
US
LE
S P
RO
JEC
TEU
RS
- R
ehea
rsal
M
atte
rs
SÉ
AN
CE
S IN
FO -
Col
labo
ratio
ns n
ordi
ques
Which content session(s) did you LIKE / DISLIKE the most?
NE
WS
RO
UN
D 1
&2
GE
NE
RA
L A
SS
EM
BLY
& IE
TM T
alks
and
Lis
tens
PLE
NA
RY
- R
ight
s an
d R
espo
nsib
ilitie
s: R
ight
?
ME
NTO
R R
OO
M
ME
ETI
NG
GR
OU
P -
Arti
vism
, Rai
se y
our v
oice
ME
ETI
NG
GR
OU
P -
Net
wor
ks o
f the
Fut
ure!
M
EE
TIN
G G
RO
UP
- E
ngag
ing
Loca
l Aud
ienc
es
and
Com
mun
ities
ME
ETI
NG
GR
OU
P -
Mus
ic T
heat
re
ME
ETI
NG
GR
OU
P -
Ret
hink
ing
Fest
ival
s W
OR
KIN
G G
RO
UP
- C
eleb
ratio
n of
Stu
pidi
ty
WO
RK
ING
GR
OU
P -
Arts
and
Hum
an R
ight
s W
OR
KIN
G G
RO
UP
- R
ight
Dis
cour
ses
WO
RK
ING
GR
OU
P -
Sta
rting
from
scr
atch
: In
Sea
rch
Of T
he N
ew M
odel
W
OR
KIN
G G
RO
UP
- E
thic
s of
Eng
agem
ent
WO
RK
ING
GR
OU
P -
From
Bud
apes
t with
Fea
r…
LEA
RN
ING
SE
SS
ION
- Ju
gglin
g R
ight
with
Soc
ial M
edia
A
RTS
IN F
OC
US
- R
ehea
rsal
Mat
ters
AR
TS IN
FO
CU
S -
Sam
tale
køkk
enet
IN
FO S
ES
SIO
N -
Nor
dic
Col
labo
ratio
ns
INFO
SE
SS
ION
- E
urop
ean
Cul
tura
l Pol
icy
To
war
ds 2
020
PARTICIPANTS’ FEEDBACK REPORT | IETM Plenary Meeting in Copenhagen, 28 - 31 March 2012 8
ARTISTIC PROGRAMME
“The performances I
saw were excellent”
* * *
“I appreciated the intensive
artistic programme”
* * *
“ Transport to performances
was well-organised.”
Overall, the artistic programme and the programme of exploring the city were rated "quite interesting" by the participants. Even though some mentioned some confusion in the ticket system, many participants praised the professionalism of the staff at the ticket desk.
PARTICIPANTS’ FEEDBACK REPORT | IETM Plenary Meeting in Copenhagen, 28 - 31 March 2012 9
NEXT MEETINGS The answers to the open question on topics to be discussed at future meetings are very diverse. However, some trends can be pointed out. Some participants suggested discussing more about the financial and social crisis and the role of IETM and artists in this context.
This leads to question the link between the cultural and political fields (how to lobby?, to commit oneself?) Finally, some wish to develop more practical sessions eg on funding (alternative sources, grants), on building international collaborations, on new technologies and marketing via social networks.
PARTICIPANTS’ FEEDBACK REPORT | IETM Plenary Meeting in Copenhagen, 28 - 31 March 2012 10
Thank you for participating in IETM Copenhagen! IETM Copenhagen was organised in partnership with:
• Dansens Hus: http://www.dansenshus.se • Dansehallerne : http://www.dansehallerne.dk • IETM Danish members
The meeting in Copenhagen and the artistic programme were supported by:
• The Danish Arts Council Committee for Performing Arts: http://www.kunst.dk/english/credits/arts-council/ • The Capital Region of Denmark: http://www.regionh.dk/English/English.htm • The Bikuben foundation: http://www.bikubenfonden.dk
IETM is supported by:
This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This communication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the theme, the organisers and the content of the meeting on IETM website: www.ietm.org
Pictures: © Dmitrij Matvejev, © Vahid/doublExpose