management models for culture communication culture communication for management models
DESCRIPTION
Management Models for Culture Communication Culture Communication for Management Models. The “Economics of Culture”. is a discipline which only recently acquired attention all over the world in business and political economy. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
1
Management Models for Culture Communication
Culture Communication for Management Models
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
2
The “Economicsof Culture”
is a discipline which only recently acquired attention all over the world in business and
political economy.
Still different scientists noticed its importance and the strong interrelation between its main
components – economy and culture
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
3
John Maynard Keynes
“Our experience demonstrated clearly that such activities cannot be accomplished if they depend on the only profit and financial success. The usage and the eventual distruction of the God-given talent which submits to the aim of profit is one of the worst crimes of modern capitalism.The public financing must regard also the expences (“improductive” ex-facte) but linked to the creation of the values outside the market (which for this reason cannot be appraised by the market in sense to assign them a price)” (“Art and the State”)
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
4
Adam Smith
The production and the conservation of these goods not only cannot be regulated by the “invisible hand” because it needs the special cost supported by the State, but the quota of this cost must grow while the nation well-being grows.
William Baumol: ...the problem is not whether the theatre or the dance must be supported by the State but in what measure in must be realized.
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
5
Italian experience
“the State considers the theatrical activity to be of relevant general interest because it is aimed to favour musical, cultural and social education of society” (Law n° 800 1967 art.1) In 1985 a Common Performance Fund (CPF) was instituted (Law n°163 1985). Its aim is to deliver a definite and organic sistemation to the financial interventions of the State in favour of the performing art.
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
6
In 1985-2008 the CPF reduced by 64,71%,
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
7
Public financing: partitioning criteria
CPF 2008 %
Lyrical and Symphonical Foundations 45,72Music 13,41Dance 2,03Prose 17,87Circle 1,48Cinema 19,31Performance observatory 0,14Committees and Commissions 0,04
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
8
The cost of personnel in performing art (2008)
Theatre Totale Contribuits €
Cost ofPersonnel €
% Personnel Contribuits
Comunale Bologna 18.938.349 17.938.909 95%
Maggio Musicale Fiorentino 30.953.639 27.779.000 90%
Carlo Felice Genova 26.224.210 19.398.000 74%
Scala Milano 50.170.269 64.702.000 129%
S. Carlo Napoli 41.654.379 23.685.545 57%
Massimo Palermo 37.868.599 27.317.510 72%
Opera di Roma 52.556.467 41.697.000 79%
Regio di Torino 31.917.860 22.654.482 71%
Verdi di Trieste 20.921.639 17.302.000 83%
Fenice di Venezia 26.035.727 19.690.000 76%
Arena di Verona 23.266.605 29.400.000 126%
S. Cecilia di Roma 24.804.940 21.842.900 88%
Lirico di Cagliari 29.651.093 17.395.000 59%
Petruzzelli di Bari 6.300.000 1.429.200 23%
TOTAL 421.263.776 352.231.546 84%
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
9
USA: Change in Unresticted Net Assets (CUNA)
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008Earned Income 3.282.056 3.541.498 3.666.855 4.243.346 3.936.890Contributed income 2.295.593 2.923.264 2.796.185 2.766.120 2.946.123Total Income 5.577.649 6.464.762 6.463.040 7.009.466 6.883.013
Payroll 2.877.128 3.128.322 3.272.061 3.481.100 3.638.227Other Expenses 2.356.148 2.634.323 2.750.774 3.028.950 3.327.400Total Expenses 5.233.276 5.762.645 6.022.835 6.510.050 6.965.627
CUNA 344.373 702.117 440.205 499.416 -82.614
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
10
In Russia
In 2009 the financing of culture entities was equal to 114 mlrd rubles, but these funds
were destinated majorly to the reconstruction of Bolshoi Theatre and the stage construction
in Mariinski Theatre
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
11
Performing Art and Balanced Scorecard
The importance of this instrument derives from:
•International crisis and the reduction of the public financing•Optimization of the costs structure necessity
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
1212
According to the data of World Bank
Since June, 8 2007 till March, 9 2009 the financial losses on the stocks all over the world were equal to
$ 31.000 miliards
Overall GDP of USA, China, Japan and India
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
1313
has been elaborated on the base of research results obtained by professors of Harvard School of Economics Robert Kaplan and David Norton in 1990 .The research was conducted with the only aim: discover new ways of business efficiency increasing and business goals achieving.
Balanced Scorecard
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
1414
Norton and Kaplan based
their research on the following hypothesis:
by means of only financial indicators the management does not obtain sufficient information for right and timely decision
making
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
1515
In 1978 the difference between the balance-sheet and market value of american
companies was equal to 5%, in 1998 - 72%.
In Italy in 2005 the stock (S&P Mib) value of the enterprises was three times greater than
their tangible assets value
This hypothesis is founded
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
1616
According to Fortune
in 2007 Balanced Scorecard was used as the principal strategy implementation tool in 402
companies from Fortune-500 list:
Coca-Cola, BP, General Electric, McDonalds, L'Oreal, BMW, Boeing, Samsung Electronics and
others.
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
1717
According to BalancedScorecard approach
The strategic development of the firm is analyzed under four interconnected aspects:
•Finance; •Relations with clients;•Internal processes; •Innovations and personnel development
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
18
The main pricniple ofBalanced Scorecard
Which became the reason of high efficiency of this management technology is
it is possible to manage only what you can measure
18
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
19
BALANCED SCORECARD1. Operational volume (output)
• Public = number of spectators• Production = number of performances• Production = number of tickets• Average repeating per ticket = numero di rappresentazioni/numero titoli
2. Economy (input and costs)• Artistic costs impact = artistic costs / total costs • Structure costs impact = structure costs / total costs • Personnel costs impact = personnel costs / total costs • Revenues partitioning = revenues per category / total revenues• Covering with proper resources = proper resources / total costs • Revenues per spectator = proper revenues / number of spectators• Public contributes per spectator = public contributes / number of spectators
3. Efficiency• Productivity of labour = number of performances / personnel• Productivity of labour = number of performances / personnel• Unitary cost per performance = total costs / number of performances• Unitary cost per spectator = total costs / number of spectators
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
20
BALANCED SCORECARD (2)
4. Artistic dimension: success and quality• Innovation = number of new performances• Rehersal average time = number of days / number of
tickets• Filling grade = number of spectators / max
number• Frequency = number of performances / days• Presences in subscription = number of entries in subscription• Subscription impact = number entries in subscription /
number of spectators• Audience variation = spectators, subscriptions X /
spectators, subscriptions X-1
5. Fund raising• Revenues = Revenues from tickets / total
revenues• Public financing = Public contributes / total revenues• Private financing = Private contributes / total
revenues
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
2121
Problems of BSC application in Russia:following the fashion
Some companies announce enormous successes after BSC introduction – turnover increased by 35-50% in 2 months.
Certainly, such affirmations are nothing but PR, BSC is the strategy implementation system and it is impossible to expect such high operational benefits.
M. Cecchi, P. Malyzhenkov, HSE, Moscow, 7 April 2010
2222
The majority of consultants work on the elaboration of BSC and not its implementation and the customer is not able to realize it by his own.
the percentage of really implemented BSC projects in Russian companies is about 3%
Source: Managers’ Society“Executive”, 2008
Problems of BSC application in Russia:elaboration and implementation gap