Revisiting AIM��s Master of Arts Management program at Sydney Opera House

Jack Moran
Thu, 12 Aug 2021 15:13:37 +0000
Uncategorized

Revisiting AIM’s Master of Arts Management Program at Sydney Opera House

by Dr. Paul Saintilan

This is the story of presenting an educational program under the sails of an international icon – the Sydney Opera House. It is a story that is influenced by the extraordinary architecture and working life of Sydney Opera House. It provides an example of an imaginative, ��industry embedded�� program, a joint venture between an industry leader and an educational institution. It provides insights that may be of interest to those looking to close the gap between theory and practice through this type of partnership. The interest in industry sponsored microcredentials, the shakier, post pandemic finances of performing venues, and the delivery options opened up by blended and online learning, may increase future interest in concepts like this.

When Sydney Opera House received UNESCO World Heritage Listing, it was pronounced as ��one of the indisputable masterpieces of human creativity, not only in the 20th century but in the history of humankind.�� To see yachts on Sydney Harbour gliding over crushed, sparkling sapphires, and to see their curved white sails echoed in the white gleaming tiles of the Sydney Opera House is an uplifting sight. The construction of the building called for extraordinary innovation. This program showed that management realised they needed to take this innovative spirit into the programs they present within the building. Note that the venue never just presented opera, it has always been a major Australian venue for a broad range of arts and entertainment. Prior to the COVID pandemic Sydney Opera House presented 2,500 performances each year in multiple on-site venues.

In 2005 I commenced work at the Australian Institute of Music (AIM) as head of Arts and Entertainment Management. One of the first challenges was to overhaul our ��Master of Arts Management�� program and I learned that Dr Norman Gillespie, the Sydney Opera House CEO, had been involved in a staff workshop not long before my arrival. It was suggested he may be a useful sounding board.

The overall vision of the Master of Arts Management program was to take MBA content and customise it for arts, music and entertainment. It aimed to help bridge the gap between theory and practice, academics and practitioners, and generic business school thinking and what works in the idiosyncratic environment of arts and entertainment. A partnership with an international icon like Sydney Opera House would enable us to bring this to life. By integrating the program into the fabric of a major venue it would immerse students in a real world artistic environment. Students would find themselves queuing behind opera characters in costume for their lunch in the Green Room. They could listen to the experience of Sydney Opera House staff participants and guest speakers.

We would employ lecturers who had immense industry experience but would ensure it had academic integrity. As a niche, masters level program, it would have small seminar groups, which allow for questioning, interaction, and sharing of ideas. Also, in an industry that was something like a jungle, we wanted to see the course promoting best practice, the pursuit of excellence, and greater professionalism and thoughtfulness in the way we approach the challenges of managing arts and entertainment businesses.

We knew the Opera House considered itself a place of education. The fees charged for higher degrees are not insignificant, and we knew non-profit organisations like Sydney Opera House were always chasing more revenue. So economically it intuitively seemed it could work.

In February 2006 we sent a short proposal to the Sydney Opera House CEO to reflect upon prior to a meeting we had arranged the following week. The proposal was that Sydney Opera House and AIM would enter into a joint venture agreement to present arts management courses at the Opera House, with the content developed and delivered by AIM (but developed in consultation with Opera House management and with appropriate quality assurance mechanisms in place). We noted the Opera House��s ��Registered Training Organisation�� status to deliver vocational (trade style) education, but this activity would be strongly differentiated in terms of content, delivery and target market.

We argued that the Opera House needed AIM to realise this, because: education is AIM��s core business; AIM is fully accredited to provide postgraduate degrees; AIM is equipped to take on the full administrative burden of the students, possessing for example, customised software to handle educational enrolments and the maintenance of student records; AIM already had appropriate unit outlines and content which could be adapted for this purpose; we also mentioned key management and the composition of Advisory Committees. In summary, AIM had the expertise, time and commitment to drive the project through for launch in 2007.

To be honest, the whole thing was a bit of a stretch, and we thought the probability lay with rejection, not acceptance. But it was certainly worth the cab fare down to the Opera House to find out. The following week we met up with them and talked through the concept. We sensed a glimmer of possibility in the meeting as the CEO seemed to be someone who wanted to establish a reputation as taking on bureaucracy and doing innovative, even risky things. Having come out of the private sector, he clearly wanted that to be his legacy. They said they were interested in receiving more information on how it could work. This led to a back and forth, and finally in July we had ignition, in the form of an email from the CEO confirming that he considered we had an in principle agreement to move forward.

I worked with two Sydney Opera House staff to progress the contractual side until in September we executed a three year contract. We presented the program to the Sydney Opera House senior management team and took on board advice. In October we held an Information Evening on site for prospective students and in February 2007 we presented our first seminar.

Delivery model

Early in the discussions the CEO made it clear that for security reasons, and to lower the operational impact, the only way the program could be delivered in partnership with them, was for it to be broken up into a series of discrete, smallish events. Saturday was viewed as a good day as key resources such as the Boardroom lay unused. This necessitated breaking the course content into a series of modules, with the core of each module being two days of intensive face to face teaching presented on a Friday and Saturday. AIM was invited to design within the parameters of 48 days venue access per year. This meant 24 two day (Friday/Saturday) seminars, one seminar presented on average each fortnight.

The purpose built Training Room, with 360 degree whiteboards, would be used on the Fridays, and the Boardroom on the Saturdays. The Training Room was deep in the bowels of the building, like a nuclear bunker, probably below sea level, while the Boardroom was on an upper level with panoramic views of Sydney Harbour. (Over time we realised the degree to which the fluorescent lighting of the Training Room could cause fatigue, in such a highly intensive educational program, so we swapped the room for one with better natural light.)

Concentrating the face to face time into an intensive two day seminar structure had advantages. For part time students, it minimised the impact on busy working lives and made it easier for international students to undertake part time work. It also helped us attract presenters who would simply be unavailable for more conventional weekly lectures.

It should be noted that a module was an 8 week process, not a 2 day seminar. Four weeks before the seminar students would receive an information pack, including an agenda, and material to be prepared in advance. This may include case studies focussed on an arts and entertainment context, academic journal articles, excerpts from textbooks, industry reports (etc). After the seminar there was the submission of an assessment exercise. The nature of the exercise naturally varied depending on the nature of the module, but assignments generally provided an opportunity for students to apply theoretical principles to real world examples that held personal interest and relevance (eg projects in the student��s workplace or personal hobbies). On most occasions there was a short exam at the conclusion of the seminar. This never constituted more than 25% of the total module assessment, but you needed to pass the exam to pass the module. Students also received a seminar participation mark worth 10% of the assessment.

Modules flowed in a rolling, dovetailed pattern as depicted below:

Thus, part time students would only need to attend one seminar on average each month, which meant one Friday away from work, and the precise dates for the seminars would be communicated in August the previous year, giving students significant notice. The rolling process also meant that assessment feedback was provided to students in a steady stream.

Because of the intensity of the seminars, care was required to ensure different activities were integrated to stop the experience either ��frying their brains�� or becoming boring: formal lectures; guest presentations; case study discussions; group work (eg a marketing plan group exercise); student games (such as Deming��s famous ��red beads experiment�� when looking at quality); role plays (eg Human Resources Management); student presentations (eg a business concept in New Venture Planning, an event concept in Event Management etc). At the conclusion of the seminar, AIM generally supervised one drink at a bar on an external concourse with views over Sydney Opera House, to allow students to decompress and relax after the exam.

The preparation reading and exercises ensured students had a common base which could be interrogated and worked with during the seminar. The assignment provided an opportunity for post-seminar reflection and application to a ��real world�� context. In terms of the degree structure, students completed 20 modules and a major project to satisfy the requirements of the Masters degree. The major project could be sponsored by an arts organisation. Students could also exit with smaller, nested qualifications (a Graduate Certificate and Graduate Diploma).

Lecturers

Generally, we were after enthusiastic, passionate lecturers with deep arts industry knowledge, who could bring theory to life in a practical, relevant and motivating way. Ideally they had experience of both non-profit and commercial environments, as well as teaching and academic credentials. For theoretical subjects we went for academics with PhDs to ensure the academic integrity of the modules. For practitioner lecturers, we sometimes brought in an academic to present a two hour segment looking at an aspect of theory.

We usually started by asking ourselves who was the best person in Australia to deliver the content. When I phoned people up and they realised this was their chance to ��play Sydney Opera House��, everyone was interested. Even someone like Tim Walker, an Australian working in London as CEO and Artistic Director of the London Philharmonic, presented the ��Strategic Partnership Negotiation�� module twice, on his frequent returns to the country. Most of the lecturers we attracted would not have been interested in three hour sessions each week for 13 or 14 weeks.

The first lecturer I signed up was Michael Smellie while he was still in New York exiting out as Chief Operating Officer of Sony BMG worldwide. He would chair our leadership seminar. He said he was interested in principle in participating because ��If you can give me a graduate who can have a conversation with the Chief Financial Officer and not freak them out, and have a conversation with an artist and not freak them out, then you will be doing the world a great favour, because this is comparatively rare.�� This became something of a vision for the program.

Around 88 lecturers and guest speakers were employed in the first three and a half years, 32 of them women. I was most proud of the lecturers when a student would ask about a deal, or court case or innovative initiative and the lecturer would say that they had actually been involved as a lawyer or financier or consultant on that very deal. This happened several times in the seminars I attended.

Students

In terms of the student profile, the average seminar (of up to 24 students) comprised around a third who were already working managerially within the arts and entertainment industry, a third who were artists like musicians and dancers who wanted to move into the management side and another third who were IT, law and other professionals looking to work in the arts. The average age was 34 (very mature) and they were often working in good jobs, so they could relate the seminar content to their industry experience and introduce this into the seminar discussion. Other students would learn from these observations. We decided not to admit students into the program who did not have at least two years industry experience, because otherwise they had no ��real world�� frame of reference to which they could relate the concepts and seminar discussion.

Eighty percent of students ended up enrolling part-time. The gender split was approximately equal, and we had two students who flew internationally for each seminar �C one student who completed the entire degree flying 21 times from New Zealand, and one who completed a Graduate Diploma flying from Hong Kong.

We offered any ��unsold�� seminar places to Sydney Opera House Human Resources. The attendance of Opera House staff created a better learning environment for lecturers and enrolled students, with more dynamism and input. It increased staff training opportunities creating more value for our joint venture partner. It increased the knowledge and understanding of staff towards the program which would be a positive when it came to renewing the agreement further down the line. It also more authentically connected the program to Sydney Opera House, rather than it arbitrarily sitting on Bennelong Point.?

Measurement

AIM provided to the Sydney Opera House quarterly reporting that summarised financial performance and student evaluation feedback. In terms of the student experience, module evaluation feedback indicated the program was a resounding success. The aggregate student evaluation statistics for the first four years of the program were excellent – ?97% of seminar participants were satisfied with the seminars, with 81% being more than or extremely satisfied. In the first three and a half years of the program, only 10% of enrolled students sought to leave the program – 5% left without a degree, and 5% with a smaller award. The graduate outcomes were high with a number of students going on to make impact in major record companies, performing arts organisations, and commercial arts organisations. They attested to the value they gained from the experience.

On the financial front it paid its way and made a modest contribution to AIM and Sydney Opera House. It earned enough for Sydney Opera House to renew the agreement several times. But it did not generate a fortune because of the tutorial style capacity limitations. Higher education providers start generating significant sums when some of the delivery can involve hundreds of students, online or in a lecture theatre. Small student numbers tend to be more marginal. As we move towards blended delivery, the idea of using an online dimension to increase capacity is an option that could be further explored by other projects.

The institutional evaluation by AIM was more complicated as the program was seen to be ��high maintenance��. It was more complex than other programs to deliver because its delivery style meant it sat outside the normal institutional processes that supported other programs. The rolling assessment needed to be treated differently, the module structure meant we had two Semesters for the Opera House program but three Trimesters for other programs. This created problems for its sustainability.

One value of the Masters program, was that it became our Formula 1 car, with our Bachelor degree in entertainment management being the road car. By virtue of the calibre of the lecturers and guest lecturers we could attract, resources, ideas, contacts, and insights were acquired that could inform the Bachelor program.

The program underwent a regulatory audit in 2009 which it passed. But we could see that further work would be needed to address changing regulatory requirements for Masters degrees in Australia. Around 10 years after the program��s launch it was AIM, not Sydney Opera House, that decided to ��teach out�� and close the program (I left after four years, moving to Switzerland).

It is hoped that these reflections will spark ideas in those seeking to reimagine education.

Feel free to contact the author directly via paulsaintilan@gmail.com

“In terms of the student experience […] the program was a resounding success. […] 97% of seminar participants were satisfied with the seminars. […] The graduate outcomes were high with a number of students going on to make impact in major record companies, performing arts organisations, and commercial arts organisations.”

Paul Saintilan, Program Leader, Australian Institute of Music

About the Author

Paul Saintilan is an author, ‘pracademic’, teacher, industry consultant and educational content developer. He has held senior international marketing roles with EMI Music and Universal Music in London, and has served as Director of Marketing & Development at Musica Viva Australia and CEO of Music Australia. For five years he held senior educational roles at The Australian College of the Arts (‘Collarts’?) in Melbourne, from Dean to Group CEO/MD. He launched and ran the Australian Institute of Music’s Master of Arts Management program at Sydney Opera House from 2007 to 2010. He has a PhD from Deakin University, an MBA from AGSM, and has published two books: the Routledge textbook Managing Organizations in the Creative Economy; and Musicians & Addiction: Research and Recovery Stories. A meditator for over 20 years, he was a co-founder and first Chairman of the international Buddhist Recovery Network. He brings an international perspective having lived outside of Australia for over 12 years, in London, Geneva and New York. He is available for project or casual contract work.