Ever since hearing Jonah Lehrer talk about the Marshmallow Test at Dynamic Adaptability, I have been dying to see the kids squirming as they resist the tasty treat. Jonah’s explanation was funny, but this video is priceless. I love the girl who eats it before the researcher even leaves the room.
Here is an article that describes the test of how well kids can postpone gratification, which is shockingly predictive of later success in life. Stay tuned for video from Jonah’s presentation.
The Stanford Social Innovation Review has an article this month about donations via mobile phone. The $32.5 million raised by the Red Cross for the Haiti earthquake through text donations revealed the potential of this tool, and piqued the attention of fundraisers everywhere who were skeptical about the potential of text donations. Some worry that this will result in smaller donations (text donations are limited to $10) and that people will give in response to urgent appeals, but not for long-term operational needs. And of course, there are the overhead costs to organizations for using the service.
I think these are kinks that will be worked out as this fundraising method becomes more mainstream, which it will. The more important point is that this money was raised through $5 and $10 donations, and much of it from 18-29 year olds, a population that does not typically give in large amounts anyway. Text donations shows that the impulse buying mentality can be mobilized for social good, as well as personal consumption. In fact, research on why people give suggests that making a spur of the moment donation to a global crisis might give us the same satisfaction as that impulse buy at the checkout counter. So let’s stop letting the corporations have all the fun and mobilize psychology and technology for good.
Click here for just released research by Helicon and Wolf Brown on donor motivations.
Unbeknownst to us, Barry Hessenius did some informal polling of the crowd at the San Francisco Dynamic Adaptability conference. Spurred by a question of whether this “spa day for the mind” was really of any practical value to the participants, he asked more than a dozen attendees why they attended, what they expected to get out of it, and whether their expectations were met. He wrote on his blog:
Surprisingly, there was a general consensus, at least among those I talked to (and I spoke with both artists and arts administrators – but tried to question only those people I didn’t know) – that the reason they came was that they felt somewhat isolated in their daily work (artistic or administrative) and that this kind of gathering allowed them to re-connect to the larger whole of our field, providing them the opportunity to feel less isolated. They came not necessarily because they thought they would leave with any real solutions to the problems they faced, but rather for encouragement, for motivation, for camaraderie – for making that elusive connection to those similarly situated to themselves, and for new ideas and new thinking.
Inspiration and connection were what we intended offer, so it was gratifying to come across this informal exit poll. Increasingly, I feel that the “solution” to our “problems” is not a new business model or technology platform or audience strategy but a new state of mind that is open, creative and collaborative. So it was fun to try that on with a group of 700 people who felt the same way.
Some people might have preferred to forget this part of the conference, but I think that the challenge Philip offers to the arts sector is worth remembering. After explaining the Krulwich principle (thrill yourself) and the Avatar principle (we look to art to inspire us) he says, “I look forward to the recession and the day when a fire will blow through this forest.” He says “if you’re thrilling your audience and making amazing work you will survive. And if you’re not, you shouldn’t have a career.”
You might not agree with him 100%, or at all, but its worth thinking about. Why do we do what we do, if not to thrill and inspire?
Perry Chen describes how Kickstarter provides a structure to “lubricate” the process of getting support for creative projects. Its simple structure masks the extensive thinking the site creators have done about the psychological nuances of the relationship between the creator and stakeholders of a creative work. The elements of a good fundraising campaign are built into the site itself…after that, its all you.
Some key components that make the tool successful:
Perry Chen talks about how people using Kickstarter are finding innovative ways to provide value to their backers. He distinguishes between tokens of appreciation (think: snazzy totebag) and items that have real value to the recipient. Note, this doesn’t necessarily mean something more expensive. In addition to thanking someone for their support, these gifts have the potential to create a deeper, more personal bond between the artist and the recipient around the creative project. Check out Kickstarter to see some of the cool items people are offering in exchange for support.
This wins the Most Memorable Moment prize for the conference, hands down. To describe his experience fundraising for the Fund for Artist grant he received, Philip Huang said, “i’m not going to talk about how i did it, i’m going to show you how i did it.” He stood up, told the audience to take out their wallets, and pitched the Witness the Fitness Tour, a performance that would take place on the sidewalks in front of all of the San Francisco 24 Hour Fitnesses. He solicited a competing proposal from a fellow artist. Michelle Tea proposed a series of feminist performance workshops in women’s dressing rooms of downtown boutiques. Money rained from the balconies-together they raised $400 in three different currencies. It was subversive, hilarious and totally on point.
Kary Schulman from San Francisco Grants for the Arts introduces the San Francisco Dynamic Adaptability conference by reading a quote from Neil Archer Rowan about the need for the cultural sector to challenge its assumptions with bold ideas. She defines dynamic adaptability as, “the ability of an organism to modify itself in ways that make it more fit for existence under the conditions of its environment.” She exclaims, “so we’re talking about ecology here!” Its a short clip, worth a watch.
The San Francisco Dynamic Adaptability Conference was a blast. The conversations were stimulating, and, more importantly, the box lunches were a hit. We’re going to use this site to post information about upcoming dynamic adaptability happenings and consolidate relevant chatter on the web. We’ll also post videos from the conference, so stay tuned.
