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


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?


• 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”


• 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.”


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”


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


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.


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.


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

Documents

Participants' Feedback Report - IETM meeting in Copenhagen - 2012