Creative businesses are almost never in the business they think they are. Sure, you might take pictures, put flowers on a table, design furniture, install lights, but that is just what you do – the medium for your art. The business is what lies underneath and supports multiple mediums if you would like it to – think about almost any fashion designer of note. How you perceive the business underneath will determine the opportunities you see in front of you.
The following will apply to almost any creative business, but, for illustrative purposes, let’s look at two successful event businesses. Both design and produce more than fifty events a year, sometimes with multiple events happening on the same day. Both have principal owners/designers who are well known separate and apart from their businesses. Event Company A has fifteen or so “associates” that do most of the design and producing on their own with a blessing here and there from the principal. A premium is charged for direct involvement by the principal. Event Company B has developed a system that requires involvement of many of the fifteen employees it has. Yes, there are principal producers, but it is a much more team centric approach with all of the resources of the business using the system.
No comment on which is the better business or has the brighter future. Assume they are equally successful, each with different, but equally valuable opportunities for the future. The point is to look at the underneath of each event business, understand what it actually is and where the structure will take the business. Event Company A is an agency. No real different from a real estate broker or modeling agency. The associates themselves are revenue generators and use the brand of the principal to drive business. Of course, this model works, just ask Barbara Corcoran. The future though is predicated on growing both the number of associates and geography of potential events. As much as other things might help, volume and quality associates (i.e., agents) are what matters.
Event Company B on the other hand is an information management business. Its success is predicated on the flow of information, both internal and external. The faster and more efficiently information is disseminated, the better the event. Their employees think about how to improve the system and use it for other purposes as much as they do about finding the next job. While Event Company A might ultimately get more events regionally, Company B might be able to produce better globally. Also, the information itself might become valuable. Much more likely that Company B would be in a better position to deliver data (maybe about social media) to clients, employees and colleagues alike.
Again, not a question of which is better, just what each can see or not see. Company B will see the value of information, Company A the value of a great producer. Oh, and information management is a pretty good business too. Just ask the folks at Zillow.
The issue almost always arises when one looks over and wants to be the other. Inevitably, there is frustration as agents do not want a system and integrated players always look for the system. Yes, you have to choose who you are underneath and go from there. If you do not, you miss opportunities that should be hitting you on the head. Clearly, Company A has developed a terrific methodology to train and support independently operating agents. What is that training and support worth? Who should buy it and why? A much better discussion than how can we talk to each other better. Company B already knows the answer to that question far better than Company A ever will. Do what you do, focus on how to do it better, then ask where else it applies. Art always transcends its medium and so does your creative business.
