Cashing in on corporate culture

BY DITA DE BONI

Art ... a communication of an artist's soul, or a vehicle for the perfectly executed marketing strategy?

If your chief executive would rather support Seurat than the Super 12 or Warhol over the Warratahs, he or she is part of a shrinking group.

But unlike the days of yore, when artists hovered like Oliver Twist for more crumbs from the corporate dinner table, marketing departments are now communicating over how art can offer "strategic vehicles for profile-raising based on demographic analysis."

In other words, tie-ins with art must be able to provide solid commercial benefit.

Today's corporate support for the arts and culture sector stems not from philanthropy, but from well-honed business and marketing objectives which seek a more defined and infinitely more captured audience than an array of sport fans.

An example is law firm Simpson Grierson's announcement that after 10 years of sponsoring individual exhibitions at the Auckland Art Gallery, it will sponsor the "Simpson Grierson season" - a seven-month programme of exhibitions including public lectures and supporting events.

The sponsorship has already attracted much attention with a well-attended opening ceremony last week, an emotional, centre-stage speech by chairman Rob Fisher and the blessing of mayor Christine Fletcher.

A lesser-known Picasso work, Verre et pichet (Glass and pitcher), headlines the first exhibition, and may help draw the attention of art-lovers to the possibilities of corporate help.

Simpson Grierson says it has paid "tens of thousands" for its sponsorship. As the mayor delivered a speech praising the firm's actions, the arts' need for partnerships with corporations became very apparent.

Less apparent is the benefit Simpson Grierson will gain, other than gaining the rosy glow of good corporate citizenship.

Corporate largesse is not high on the list of the firm's priorities, says partner Peter Stubbs.

He says the company has three main reasons for supporting the Art Gallery.

"Firstly, it provides us a space to host our clients in a unique and pleasant setting; secondly, it gives us a chance to say thank-you to our clients (the Auckland City Council); thirdly, it enhances our name."

The cocktails and black-tie dinners hosted by the Art Gallery for Simpson Grierson clients is part of the partnership that is the law firm's sponsorship "package."

But Mr Stubbs also sees the attributes ascribed to the Art Gallery as being neatly aligned with the Simpson Grierson brand name.

"Sponsorship is about seeking to have the parties' attributes associated in people's minds. The Art Gallery is about work that is innovative, new and exciting, and in turn, that helps ally those attributes with Simpson Grierson."

But major cultural sponsorships such as Simpson Grierson and the Art Gallery, Compaq and Te Papa, and Montana and almost everything else are not the norm.

Between 1997 and 2000, the pool of corporate sponsorship has been shrunk by an uncertain economy, and the money left has been diverted to events such as Apec, the rugby World Cup and the America's Cup.

Oil companies have withdrawn from sponsorships of the National Opera and the Royal New Zealand Ballet, and the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra's cash crisis has worsened as sponsors become scarce.

A 1998 Ministry of Culture and Heritage survey of corporate sponsors showed that while businesses recognise that arts and cultural events "increase brand awareness" and reach "a particular market segment," more than half spent less than 20 per cent of their sponsorship budgets on cultural events and activities.

Andrea Goble of the arts-focused Funding Information Service agrees, saying corporate financing of art - complementing around $33 million of purely philanthropic and government cash - is "drying up."

But Mr Stubbs says sponsors may have become more picky. Deciding what to sponsor is a matter of "understanding your objectives," but he thinks sponsoring art rather than sport has two main advantages - the world of art sponsorship is less cluttered, and in art "there are no winners and losers, so there's no chance of backing a loser with art."

(Cases such as Te Papa's Virgin in a Condom work or the 14 stained blankets which won Visa Gold's art award in 1996 may be the notable exceptions.)

But supporting art has further advantages, judging by a recent survey from Performance Research in the United States. Of the 600 respondents, more than half with an interest in the arts said they would "almost always" or "frequently" buy a product from a sponsor of an event, while on average, fewer than 30 per cent of sports fans said they would chose products based on sponsorship. The exception was motor racing fans, where 72 per cent said they preferred sponsors' products.

Montana Wines' marketing manager Peter Anderson says the company has chosen to sponsor art as distinct from sport because of the similarities between wine and art - "they are both creative and often controversial."

"Part of our marketing strategy is to allocate brands to particular styles - to allocate on socio-interest grounds reflecting the occasion, like Deutz for a celebratory occasion and an everyday type of wine like Lindauer for jazz.

"But we are not in the business of writing cheques. We are not philanthropists. Our responsibility is to shareholders, and we support arts because it fits neatly with our business strategy."

Auckland Art Gallery director Chris Saines is under no illusions why corporate sponsors choose to get involved in the art world. He says the initiative to increase Simpson Grierson's sponsorship came from the gallery.

"Rather than sponsoring the major temporary exhibitions, we thought that as we were having a programme in 2000 involving a high concentration of works in quick succession, maybe they would be interested in aligning themselves with that," he said.

"We tailor a package of benefits for our sponsors that gives a better way to give the brand more recognition."

While happy to talk about the benefits of partnerships to the gallery and the corporation, Mr Saines becomes prickly over the issue of whether conflicts of interest ever arise between what sponsors want to see and what the gallery wants to exhibit.

"A number of sponsors don't blanch at public controversy. In my career, the involvement of sponsors in the content of an exhibition has never been an issue."

Montana's Peter Anderson agrees, saying sponsors should do their homework about any potential partnership with artists to avoid accidentally sponsoring something too risque.

In the case of Montana Sunday Theatre, shown on TV One, Montana does not preview all the films shown.

But Mr Anderson admits to some provisos.

"We are looking for quality drama that is challenging, and we don't aim to restrict or censor what goes on. But we'd prefer something people don't take offence from."

Despite Mr Saines' denial that sponsors would try to veto works, sources in the art world say companies are extremely selective about what they involve themselves, leaving more marginal activities to private sponsors, the Government or oblivion.

In the Ministry of Culture and Heritage's 1998 survey, more than half responding businesses would want to have a say "in some circumstances" to ensure quality and content were consistent with their culture, image and values.