Customer service - Banking style

It is really too easy to knock banks. Yes, of course they pay themselves eye-watering bonuses but that is because they are 'the best people' and without that quality of people, they would not be able to provide the superb level of service that they do.

We have the good-fortune to use two different on-line banking systems.The one from Barclays comes from the same Disney-inspired design stable as some of Microsoft's work, narrowly avoiding putting everything into Comic Sans. The wonderful pop-up screen that fills 2/3 of the screen contains lots of logos and other unhelpful information while leaving the 'OK' button just below the bottom of the screen so that you have to scroll down to find it; every time. Has no one told them or have those 'best people' not listened?

Then there is the RBS Bankline one which allows you to give your accounts a 'Alias' which is more memorable than their abbreviation of the account name but then does not allow you to use it and expects you to remember the numbers of all your business accounts. They too have a problem with things fitting on the screen and have produced something which looks like a techie's first rough.

Working with these streamlined, customer-friendly organisations is straightforward too: witness this recent message when we tried to set up a new Direct Debit payment system:

Notification of AUDDIS Migration Date - Service User Number : XXXX
Further to the submission of the above application form to Vocalink Ltd, and completion of successful testing I am pleased to confirm your Service User Number has been allocated a ‘Migration’ date for DD/MM/YYY(note; this date is the BACS Processing date and the Migration file should be submitted the working day before).

IMPORTANT : An AUDDIS 'migration' file must contain ALL DDIs held against the SUN(Service User Number). The file must be sent as a 'live' file and only the AUDDIS special transaction code of 0S is to be used. - Please refer to the AUDDIS migration guide page 17 for details.

Please also note that after being in 'migrate' status for 4 weeks you need to be set to full 'live' status. To go fully live you must ensure ALL DDI's are converted onto AUDDIS, and that you do not post D/D mandates to banks when setting up new instructions. We will contact you at this time to check these items before we make the change on the bacs site. Please refer to the AUDDIS migration guide for further details.
Should you have any queries regarding this please contact our Help Desk as soon as possible on 0870 240 5544/156 6680 option 1.

Thank You

The layout and spacing is exactly as it came through by email and it was not from a front-line person. It was from the 'second level of support'. Exciting eh? It certainly made it easy to set up the new arrangement.

Translation required ...

The following arrived today

Knowledge Co-Creation between Organisations and the Public
Call for Participation in the XXX Workshop which will be held on [Date] in YYYY

Inspired by concepts such as collective intelligence, citizen science, citizen journalism and crowdsourcing, diverse types of organisations are aiming to increase engagement with the public, collect localised knowledge, or leverage human cognition and creativity. In supporting these approaches, organisations are often provoked to make their data and processes more open, and to be inclusive of differing motivations and perspectives from inside and outside the organisation. In doing so, they raise new questions for both designers and organisations:

How are systems designed to manage data, attribute work, or draw boundaries between  ”official” and externally generated knowledge? How can openness support collaborations across organisations as well as with the public where there are shared interests?

How can the professional framed context and metadata standards be connected with the just-in-time, emergent nature of amateur online collection and curation? Is the role of the professional changed by these innovations?

How can systems be designed to leverage complementary or differing motivations, and how do we conceptualise these in design? How to prompt amateurs’ contributions that may be of value for institutions and users?

Any offers on what it means?

The email attached to it ended '... one of the most relevant conferences on social computing. Hope you will find it of interest!' Um ...

Cold calling letter

We received a letter this week from a company with whom we have not done business who claim to be 'Winning Contracts for [County]'. They presumably want our business. Why do we feel an instinctive desire to put it straight in the bin?

I am writing to tell you about a new project supporting the social economy and to invite you to participate in a survey that will help us to tailor this and future projects to your needs. (So I fill in a survey which allows you to tailor your products ... about which I so far know nothing ... to which of my needs?).

[Our scheme] is a project that aims to increase the number and size of contracts being won by social enterprises in [county] by facilitating business development, collaboration and engagement of potential product and service buyers. (Nothing like a good bit of facilitating ... it's those fleas again)

We are conducting a survey to identify the drivers and barriers for growth and scaling up of social enterprises in the area. The results of the study will enable us all to understand where to focus resources to benefit enterprises like yours ...

If you are interested in winning new or bigger contracts for your enterprise - or engaging with prime contractors of services - we would love to help ... (And your knowledge, expertise, experience and understanding of our sector is what?)

Are you any the wiser as to what they are offering and why we might be tempted to waste time on their survey?  

No 1 file, I think.

Jargon

Yes, I know you have seen it before, but it is Friday and this suited our jargon thread so well ...

Guerilla writing

The attached recently came through our e-letter box:

Not a formal training day but if you can spare an hour or so to get down to XXX where YYY  will be on hand to discuss the hugely successful community engagement programme undertaken at the gallery over the last five years. Guerilla training as well as guerilla writing!

WHO MIGHT YOU MEET?

Five Go Guerilla at the XXX … 5 writers will be in residence at the XXX  for just one day of guerilla writing activity.

They’ll be writing about the art and the Romans, meeting the public, versifying in the amphitheatre and generally celebrating 5 years of community creative engagement that has taken place at XXX.

The event marks the end of two important youth projects, Colouring the Canvas and ReHang:Reachout, which have both provided opportunities for members of ReHang, XXX's young curators group, to build skills and provide peer group activity for other young people.

It also signals the promise of more to come…

Since 2008, XXX  has seen an exciting programme of youth and community engagement that has gone from strength to strength. From a programme of youth film making and conferences, the gallery’s work with young people and community group has developed to include the launch of ReHang (gallery youth panel), Dr Who screening with writer Q&A, sport events and live gladiatorial combat.

There are music, theatre and poetry performances, family days, photography and youth artfilm installations, political debates, swing dance and glamour evenings, and, recently, the launch of the Who Might You Meet? blog and an ever-growing and successful late night events programme.

The XX Art Gallery is fast becoming one of the most innovative galleries in the city in terms of seeking to engage people of all ages and abilities through a wide range of creative interaction and public events.

So, if you want to come down to the gallery to partake of a bit of guerilla writing activity, and be part of all of this good stuff by getting your writing posted to the youth and community arts blog, drop by on ... find the 5 writers in the gallery, and join them.

And to cap it all, there will be an informal sharing of the work of the 5 writers, followed by a Q&A somewhere in the gallery…

The CVs of the five writers are also illuminating: 

One is described as a spoken word artist, photography enthusiast, poet, performer, writer and educator and  co-curator of the very popular spoken word showcase

Another is said to hail from a land between spoken word, hip-hop, and theatre. With an eye for the often overlooked in the everyday, his work is entertaining and accessible but remains rooted in a love of the craft of writing.

Another is a poet and artist who works in video and visible verse, spoken word, hip hop and live art. Her work is street, visual, emotive and rhythmical. She is a published poet, a SlamBASSADOR UK Champion and a member of various writing and performance collectives.

No one could accuse the writer of over-statement. Suddenly we feel very old. To think that a poet might not also be a performer.

Counting what counts II

... a little PS to our last posting is inspired by a recent ten page questionnaire from Arts Council England - there are 24 pages of notes on how to fill it in.

This questions about the ethnicity of any permanent or freelance staff split by 'specialist staff', 'managers' and 'others'; and they want their ages too.

It then asks us for a whole range of turnover figures which could be picked up from our published accounts if they bothered to read them. But what is this we see ... ah yes, they want those figures presented in a different way. 

It might have been good if they had warned us in advance that they might want to know this. We don't collect the ages of freelance staff and such things.

Among a whole range of questions which are irrelevant for a museum -such 'how much of your work is 'touring activity' and 'attendance at film screening days' - is a real gem: 'Please indicate the hours worked by volunteers at your organisation in the last financial year. Round your answer up to the nearest hour.'

It is the last bit we really love. Anyone who has worked with volunteers knows that they do not keep regular hours and, although we do ask them to sign in and sign out, we do not waste our time totaling the hours actually worked 'to the nearest hour'. We know how many shifts they work; will that do?

Looked at another way, rounding up the time to the nearest hour gives an accuracy of about 0.005% or better than one part in 20,000. No, we have not made a mistake. What on earth are they thinking of, asking for that level of accuracy? What are they going to do with the answer? Why have they not asked how many hours our staff work which might at least have provided a useful comparison or ratio.

It is the same mindset that tells us that visitor numbers are 5.14% up. So nice to know that the figure is accurate to one left leg. 

The questionnaire could only have been put together by someone with no concept of basic statistics or mathematics, or who has ever been involved in the real world.

It is that time of year and another questionnaire is waiting in the wings ... oh joy!   

Counting what counts

A recent report entitled Counting What Counts by Anthony Lilley and Prof Paul Moore encourages us to use what they call Big Data. We don't say that we follow every step of their argument which seems to confuse use of data in decision-making  with data drawn from web usage but we were struck by some of their general comments which echo our views on the use of data generally. Here are some paragraphs from their report.

They start with that brilliant quotation from Einstein: Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted. Essays should be written on this.

Their two main themes are language ... The sector exists in a context of narrative of subsidy and market failure which means that measurement is too often seen as a burden placed on defensively-minded organisations as a form of accountability and the use of data ... Data and information are most often used in arts and cultural settings somewhat passively, mainly to satisfy the needs of accountability.

Too often the gathering and reporting of data is seen as a burden and a requirement of funding or governance rather than an asset to be used to the benefit of the [organisation]. This point of view ... arises partly from the philosophy of dependence, subsidy and market failure which underpins much of the cultural sector.

The subsidy model tends to trap many cultural organisations in a survivalist, financial mindset and that, in turn, makes it difficult to adopt an expansive, entrepreneurial perspective when under regular implied threat by accountability.

Without the pull of a more enlightened approach to data from funders and regulators, the likelihood of widespread adoption of a more modern approach to data at the level of organisations is low.

A shift in mindset ... is a requirement. Such a shift would match much of the rhetoric of 'investment' which is used in the sector, particularly by policy and turning bodies. ... this rhetoric has largely been just that: a new term to replace the loaded word 'subsidy' rather than a genuine change.

The Arts Council England's recent ten-year strategy, Achieving Great Art for Everyone uses the term 'investment' itself no less that twenty-one times. However, there is considerable mismatch between this use of terminology and the reality of how commercial investment actually works. Too often 'investment' is used as a synonym for 'subsidy' and this linguistic sleight of hand is, in fact, sometimes harmful.

'Subsidy'. ... is a loaded term which indicates an in-built power relationship. 'Subsidy' is given to something which is weak. Conversely 'investment' is something from which we expect returns and which is thus imbued with potential. Framing public investment in culture as 'subsidy' positions it as a weak, dependent activity. When in harmony, investor and investee should be committed to achieving the same ends.

Being data-rational is a skill and not something that can imposed or encouraged by the dull demand for 'metrics' so beloved by funders. You first need to collect the right data - data which is relevant and representative - then to turn this into useful information for decision-making. 

Not understanding the difference between good and bad data, or the way figures can tell a coherent story, our funders frequently ask the wrong questions and seem satisfied with any numbers. 

I suppose you would not expect 'artists' to understand something as rational as 'numbers' which come from the other side of the great arts-science divide. Their use of the word 'investment' is probably the same: a desperate attempt to adopt the language of a business world they so little understand.  

Financial jargon

The end of the financial year looms and we are delighted to receive an update from one investment company whose promotional message is: Our multi-boutique asset management model encompasses the skills of a number of world-class specialist investment firms.

This is good to hear. We wish we knew what it meant, though. If we cannot understand it then what chance has the general tax-paying populace have? 

Artistic flair?

An invitation arrives ...

'An international leader in his field. His work concerns the integration of art with contemporary ecological thinking and real world issues.'

'... is an artist whose work is informed by net art, distributed networks, healing, protocols and curating. ... 2013 sees the next phase of her ... which takes net art to rural locations.'

What does all of this actually mean? Where is the communication? It contains lots of words but we are struggling to find any sense. Is it us or is it, just possibly, them?

Ah, those heady days

Trying to work out what we needed to do for a museum exhibition, recently I recalled the heady days when we used our nous. I made the mistake of asking a former colleague what he recommended. Here is his reply:

Surely today these imponderables would be resolved by commissioning a formative evaluation study, identifying audience needs, behavior, attitude, learning styles and preferences, through questionnaire and observational research, testing of conceptual and intellectual options with focus groups, followed by summative evaluation, using similar techniques on temporary/intermediate solutions and capable of being modified for the final interpretative offer. All actions would require a Project Execution Plan and, of course, Business Plan, with weekly management reports and a clear audit trail.

I would also recommend that this evaluation should not be done in isolation but as part of a wider study evaluating the effectiveness of all interpretative media available, either individually or as part of a mixed media platform. The study should also be perhaps wider to include the financial implications of required expenditure and anticipated income and meeting Brand objectives.

Oh joy.

Self-serving spin?

A website called Culture Geek* recently carried an article which said:

'Concerned, as they are, with history and permanence, museums are not generally in the business of shaking things up. The idea of new blood – a youthful, invigorating force that can re-imagine an organisation – is not usually high on the Trustee agenda at established and venerable institutions. Big changes are often slow, perhaps almost generational, yet these same institutions are perpetually charged with attracting new and different types of audiences.

'In fact, one of the most consistent themes of the past decade or so of museum funding, at least in the UK, has been the push for audience development: how to reach groups that have been underrepresented amongst museum visitors.'

It went on to describe an initiative with young people in Amsterdam.

It is difficult to know how to react to much that is in this piece: it is so contentious. Of course museums are concerned with history: that is what they do. Museums are absolutely about permanence in the sense of preservation for posterity but not in the sense the article suggests: as stasis of interpretation, of unchanging displays or thinking.

'New blood is ... not usually high on Trustees' agendas'. Hardly true given the many training courses for museum staff.

'... a youthful, invigorating force that can re-imagine an organisation' ... try me. Why is 'youthful' the only solution?

'...yet these same institutions are perpetually charged with attracting new and different types of audiences ... how to reach groups that have been underrepresented amongst museum visitors'. Then we reach the nub of the issue and one that is worth talking about in a less emotional, objective and more cooperative manner.

* Culture Geek's mission espouses a lovely piece of puffery: The digital revolution is transforming the world around us, industries are shifting, companies are falling (sic: perhaps they meant 'failing') and keeping up with these changes and how they effect your organisation is a full time job. This seems to be coming from the same stable as one of our earlier postings.

Another (little) word

We do not want to seem derogatory about enthusiasm which is a quality we admire greatly but just occasionally it does not stand up to the harsh glare of reality.

The latest example to catch our eye is the group Action for Children's Arts. who appear to consist of a group of enthusiasts. In a recent conference, they argued that as children up to the age of 12 made up 15% of the country's population, so 15% should be adopted as a benchmark for their fair share of public funding of the arts.

It is hard to disagree with the proposal that children should be recognised in cultural programming. But let's unpack the proposal in a bit more detail. Is childhood not a time when the balance between learning and doing should be tipped in favour of the former? Producing or showing works which appeal to, and/or are comprehensible to children, is one thing but the small print suggests that '15% of the total budget on performance or exhibition of original work by children'.

Ouch! This goes further than the original proposition. Yet again, one tiny word suggests a different agenda: one of setting a stage for children to show off their skills and receive notice and praise, rather than offering something for them to experience or admire.

No doubt arts providers will now have to fill in yet another form quantifying the level of provision for and by children, taking valuable time away from 'doing' things for all audiences. And help me out, how do we quantify what is 'for children' when one produces something for a general or family market? Is Harry Potter a children's book or a family story?

We look forward to the National Gallery and British Museum devoting 15% of their budgets to works by children. That will set a good example for us all to follow.

And at least they did not talk about 'kids'.

More museums to close ...

Cuts force more museums to close - a headline on the BBC website said today. Galleries and museums across the UK are shutting down or reducing their opening hours because of ongoing budget cuts, according to a new survey.

Will someone now understand that insisting that museums meet spurious targets is not a sensible move and that ensuring their survival is. Sorry to be gloomy but whatever the figures in this report, things are worse than it says.

Most museums are constrained by their present cost base and unable to make cuts: closing a gallery saves no money. Cutting staff is not the answer; it simply damages the long term prospects and leads to shorter opening hours. Shorter opening hours and lower service levels lead to a drop in income. A drop in income leads to ...

Most museums are hanging in there, desperately trying to hold the line with their present activities, prepared to go under with their pride intact rather than being salami-sliced to oblivion.

The foolhardy will be off chasing chimeras: responding to the wishes of the single-issue enthusiasts and grant-aiding bodies. Can you see any more specially disadvantaged, hard to reach people on low incomes out there who desperately need our 'services' ...

Oh, and by the way, we are not 'running a service'. We are running a charity in a business-like way. and charge for admission. We provide services to our customers by providing them with what they want which is what we thought a charity was about; not to our paymasters for what they want which is not.

'Delivering' expectations

I am feeling proud of myself this morning because we have delivered on several targets in one go.

A previous posting highlighted a grant scheme's requirement that we needed to help more people, and a wider range of people, to take an active part in and make decisions about heritage. Another scheme, said that we should celebrate the work of young people.

Last weekend we had a sleepover with a local school. I asked the girls to write or draw something about their favourite objects. Today we will be displaying their comments alongside their favourite objects.

So we can tick the boxes for having:

• Encouraged a wider group of people to take an active part ... in the heritage (I think: what did they really mean by this phrase?)
• Encouraged a wider group of people to make decisions about the heritage
• Encouraged young people to do some creative writing or art
• Celebrated the work of young people
• ... and probably several others that I cannot remember, or be bothered to look up

The reality is that this is the sort of thing we do all the time anyway: it is what we do; it is in our DNA. It does not need some single-issue enthusiast - whose usual habitat is the dinner or cocktail party - to impose their views on us; nor does it need a grant scheme which takes time to complete and runs the risk of rejection by someone too busy to understand what is written.

We do need a grant for our existence but I would not expect bureaucrats to know how to judge an organisation in the round. They are far too prone to takeover by single-issue enthusiasts pressing narrow agendas.

Unto those that hath 1

I have always been amused by those photographic competitions which offer a first prize of £1,000 worth of photographic equipment to their winners. Any prize is to be welcomed. If it is an amateur competion then the equipment may well be beyond the reach of the photographer's pocket. But hang on, the photographer must have had a camera and some pretty good equipment to take the photograph in the first place.

The same conundrum applies to museum awards. The Royal Albert Memorial Museum in Exeter deservedly recently won the Art Fund award which was worth £100k.

Reality check: they had just completed a £24m refurbishment project - which had gone well over the original budget, causing headaches to the managers and arts administrators - and so one can imagine that they had all the gold-plated taps they needed.

What about those museums and galleries that had not had £24m and could really do with a large sum like this? Oh, of course, it was building on excellence and rewarding success.

One word

Reading through the conditions for a recent grant application, we came across the following:
To receive a grant your project must help people to learn about their own and other people’s heritage. Your project must also do either or both of the following:

• conserve the UK’s diverse heritage for present and future generations to experience and enjoy.
• help more people, and a wider range of people, to take an active part in and make decisions about heritage.

Regular readers of this blog will have spotted the tiny little word already: the 'and' in the last line. It is not 'or', it is 'and' as in 'and make decisions about heritage'. So this funding body too has fallen for the cult of engagement. It is no longer sufficient to inform, enthral or inspire our audiences, we must now allow them to 'take decisions'.

What form are these decisions to take? Is this 'wider range of people' to be allowed to take decisions about what is and what is not collected or displayed, perhaps in preference to the 'narrower' range of people who just perhaps might know more the answers to those questions? We are old-fashioned enough to trust heritage managers to know about their subject and to make recommendations or to interpret those collections to us. This is now heresy.

Whatever happened to that old adage that we will preserve what we love; love what we understand; understand what we know about and know about things we have explored. Now, it seems, we must ask a wider range of people - perhaps uninformed - to take decisions on what we preserve, without exploration, knowledge or understanding.

And how do we 'evidence' - a horrible verbal use of the word - the 'making decisions'? That is another question.

The way forward?

A recent proposal said:

The project acknowledges the breadth and complexity of knowledge and opinion that helps us make sense of a profoundly changing world and our increasingly uncertain place in it. While scientific knowledge underpins our understanding of the systems upon which life depends, how we must change in response to that knowledge is a profoundly cultural question.

We particularly like the the idea in the last sentence: that science may have defined the problem and have a mechanism for how it works but the solution is 'profoundly cultural'. So (see last posting) that is the film and dance about climate change then. Phew, I thought we might have to do something.

STEAM not STEM

What am I meant to make of this ministerial announcement:

STEAM not STEM - Minister recognises importance of arts and humanities research

Universities and Science Minister David Willetts MP emphasised the importance of arts, humanities and social science research in the UK’s overall research base in a speech at the Policy Exchange on 4 January.  Declaring that he would not be shifting the balance of funding between the main disciplines, Mr Willetts described the UK's research community as "the most productive in the world…This broad research base emphatically includes the arts, humanities and social sciences. They are all part of the science and research ring fence." The Minister said he was attracted to the idea that "instead of just thinking about STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Maths), we should add the Arts so it becomes STEAM."

There seems to be some confusion about the difference between Science and Arts. Oh yes, of course, Art is the new Science. Roll on the first nuclear power station, mobile phone, space rocket installation ... now what dance shall we do ...

'A self-propelled underwater wheelchair is part of a surprising and unexpected spectacle'

It is probably unfair to target the London 2012 Cultural Olympiad Programme as it is like shooting fish in a barrel. But here is an extract from their website about a planned event - or should that be 'installation' -  produced by artist Sue Austin:

An ambitious series of performances by a self-propelled underwater wheelchair, which leaves traces of its joy and freedom as it flies along mid-water with its human occupant.

As you watch, this surprising and unexpected spectacle transforms your perception of the wheelchair as you too become part of the artwork.

Additionally an online debate will take place to explain the dramatic and often disorientating image of the wheelchair sweeping gracefully along.

Freewheeling is an emerging disability-led initiative dedicated to promoting the concept of disability arts as something of unique society – the 'hidden secret'.

Sue Austin’s performances aim to generate a widespread public debate about the nature and value of contemporary arts practice shaped by the experience of disability.

Unlimited is principally funded by the National Lottery through the Olympic Lottery Distributor and is delivered in partnership between London 2012, Arts Council England, Creative Scotland, Arts Council of Wales, Arts Council of Northern Ireland and the British Council.

In a press release, the artists said she was looking forward to the project which would 'mean that we can continue to contribute to the "conversation" about the value of diversity to society on a much more ambitious and wide reaching scale.

'This provides a unique creative opportunity, producing an exciting and stimulating visual experience which combines both performance and digital media to create a stimulating audience engagement and interaction opportunity with tangible artistic legacy. Our involvement in the project recognises the potential for the development of 360 degree imagery as a realistic creative medium.'

Apparently, the wheelchair 'acts as a portal that pushes one through to new levels of consciousness or awareness of life.'

There are more exciting explanations here.

This is the first of our posts to be included in two themes: Creative and jargon. Congratulations.

Jargon time

We think we need a new category: jargon time. A friend (PPE from Cambridge) sent us the following, remarking that he had no idea what they were actually about. It is like one of those random-word generator games.

‘Created by a group of leftfield (sic) change makers and thought leaders, SU: Alliance is a new breed of social enterprise. With decades of experience in the fields of social innovation and urban planning, we act as a catalyst for local authorities and social investment agencies  to do action-based research that will inform policy through achieving profitable social impact . Our purpose is to act as an intermediary to realise and scale social change; to overcome barriers to progress; to achieve more with less and to work with entrepreneurs, committed to applying their unique leadership and commercial skills in the building of value-based sustainable communities.  We will start in London.

‘Our business model is predicated on the belief that smart values can and will be the bedrock of an alliance of likeminded individuals and organizations who come together to achieve profitable gains aligned to social and environmental returns. Our purpose is therefore to align CIVIC, CORPORATE and SOCIAL investment objectives to work collaboratively so that we can accelerate change. We believe that all these institutional sectors are increasingly committed to achieving similar results. All three use the same success factors. They all want to see, in all they do:

• deep IMPACT
• measurable OUTCOMES, and
• high PROFILE

‘Our ambitions are to realise all of these through our core activities of DOING, LEARNING and INFLUENCING.

‘We want to make massive small change in our towns and cities. We want to address the role that districts, neighbourhoods and quarters have in improving urban growth by finding integrated approaches to change. Multiple interactions make up the complexity of urban society and in turn affect our rapidly changing world. We are set up to challenge this complexity and accelerate movement towards a more resilient, talented and civil city. To meet this challenge, we have created a game changing social enterprise business that brings together smart people with the assets and resources.’

Prizes will be awarded to the first correct solution. Oh, and for good measure the organisation’s email address is almost embarrassingly easy to mis-type:smarturbanism.com