An analysis of the collaboration on theatrical productions between various Chicago theaters during the 2012-2013 season, using a social network analysis approach. Includes suggestions for how off-Loop theater companies could use this approach to select shows or find future collaborative partners

1. COLLABORATION
NETWORKS
IN THE CHICAGO
THEATER 2012-2013
SEASON:
A NETWORK ANALYSIS
APPROACH
Lauren G. Johnson

2. Why collaborate at all?
 Collaborating has several benefits, including:
 Pooling and sharing resources
 Rehearsal/performance space
 Talents of cast and crew
 Audiences
 Preventing artistic stagnation
 Working with the same group can mean lack of
innovation
CC image courtesy of David Hawgood

3. Goals
Identify potential networks
by mapping the existing collaborative networks:
 Who?
 ‘Off-Loop’ theaters of Chicago
 When?
 2012-2013 Season (Approx. Sept 2012 to May/June
2013)
 How?
 Focus on the types of works produced by each
theater to find commonalities

4. Data & Methodology
 DATA (Sample Set of almost 200 theaters):
 List of Chicago area theaters taken from the Wikipedia site,
“Theatre in Chicago”
 Gathered information from each theater company’s website;
 Limited data set to those who had produced one or more works in
the 2012-2013 season
 Coded theaters as either “Resident” or “Itinerant”
 “Resident”: those with a dedicated space that functions primarily
as a theater
 “Itinerant”: those without a dedicated theater space, or any
regular performance space
 Noted All existing collaborations (as mentioned on
websites or social media)
 Coded each production by Type of Work





5. Resident Theater: Red; Itinerant Theater: Blue;
Theater Outside Chicago: Orange; Outside Organization: Purple; Chicago performance
group/theater not included in sample: Green
Finding 1: Only small number of existing collaborations

6. Resident Theater: Red; Itinerant Theater: Blue;
Theater Outside Chicago: Orange; Outside Organization: Purple; Chicago performance
group/theater not included in sample: Green
Finding 2: Even smaller number of Reciprocal Ties
(Collaborations mentioned by both theaters marked with green lines)

7. Explanations?
 In these small non-profits,
productions are like
temporary projects, with
short timelines and teams
that rely on existing
knowledge and trust
 New people = a new way
of doing things
 To answer this question,
Marketing Directors,
Artistic Directors,
and
Executive Directors
need to be interviewed
Why are there so few
existing
collaborations?
Why are these
theaters not
advertising their
collaborations?

8. Q: What’s one way network analysis can help identify
potential collaborators?
From Existing to Possible
A: Look at which types of works were produced
• most often (to find companies doing similar work)
• least often (to find an unutilized opening in the
market).

9. Most Often Produced
(2012-2013)
(Filtered to degree of 5 and above)
Resident Theaters: Red; Itinerant Theaters: Blue
•New Works & World Premiers
•Musicals
•Holiday Shows
•Well known plays/playwrights
•Shakespeare
•American Classics & Modern Works
(1960-2000)

10. Things to keep in mind…
 Most of the theaters in the “Most Often Produced” picture are
Resident theaters (14 out of 18)
 Resident theaters have to pay for and maintain a
dedicated performance space, so they may produce
familiar shows to draw in larger audiences
(However…)
 They also produce a lot of New Work and
World Premieres to be competitive with other
area theaters

11. Least Often Produced
(2012-2013)
•Molière
•Shakespeare’s Contemporaries
•American Plays pre-1960
•Modern Foreign Works
•Adaptations
•Non-Standard theater productions
(Filtered to degree of 8 and below)
Resident Theaters: Red; Itinerant Theaters: Blue

12. Things to keep in mind…
 Lesser done shows
include
 Stand-up
 Vaudeville
 Magic
 Dance,
 cabaret,
 etc
which may have
different
performance
venues
CC image courtesy of That Other Paper
on Flickr
CC image courtesy of Ted Viens on
Flickr
CC image courtesy of Eva Peris on
Flickr
CC image courtesy of Larry Lamsa on Flickr

13. For those who like histograms!
New Works by
far are the
most
produced!
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Adaptation
American…
Cabaret
Competition
Dance
Foreign
Fundraiser
Holiday
Literature
Modern
Moliere
NewWork
OpenMic
Play
Shakespe…
Sketch
Staged…
Storytelling
ToBe…
Unknown
Well-…
Workin…
World…
Types of Work Produced

14. Other potential uses of network
analysis:
 Starting a theater company?
 Find your niche
 Want to discover your competition?
 Find out who’s producing similar work

15. Limitations and Further
Research
Ways to
Improve:
Further
Research
:
 Use a comprehensive list of theaters
 Analyze across multiple seasons
 Interview management-level staff to
determine reasons for lack of
reciprocal mention
 Conduct a Content Analysis of Mission
Statements
 Conduct a Network analysis of
performance spaces (rather than
theater companies)

16. Additional Literature
 Network studies and the performing arts: Uzzi, Brian, and Jarrett Spiro. 2005.
Collaboration and creativity: The Small World Problem. American Journal of Sociology 111
(2): 447-504.
 Theater productions as temporary projects / innovation and creativity in
projects: Goodman, Richard Alan, and Lawrence Peter Goodman. 1976. Some
management issues in temporary systems: A study of professional development and
manpower-the theater case. Administrative Science Quarterly 21 (3): 494-501.
 Creativity in the workplace: Perry-Smith, Jill E., and Christina E. Shalley. 2003. The
social side of creativity: A static and dynamic social network perspective. The Academy of
Management Review 28 (1): 89-106.
 How theater companies run: Nelson, Reginald. 2010. How to start your own theater
company. Chicago, Ill.: Chicago Review Press: Distributed by Independent Publishers
Group.

17. Photo References
 Photo 1 (slide 2): Hawgood, David (2013). Rehearsal in The Studio, Royal Exchange Theatre,
[photo]. Retrieved May 9, 2014 from: http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/3373947.
 Photo 2 (slide 13, Top Left): That Other Paper (2007). Punchline|May 4|Reess Kennedy, [photo].
Retrieved May 9, 2014 from: https://www.flickr.com/photos/austins_only_paper/485344640/.
 Photo 3 (slide 13, Top Right): Viens, Ted (2011). Kiki’s Sordid Sideshow! this night of TWISTED
VAUDEVILLE DELIGHTS, IMG_6182, [photo]. Retrieved May 9, 2014 from:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/36229438@N08/6301187211/in/photolist-aAPeqP-aAS16u-
aARWJh-aAP4sZ-aAPefv-aAP2ir-aARWGS-aAPh5x-aAPhdD-aARZM3-aAP4p8-aAP9rH-
aAPhpP-aARZPU-aARX1W-7YV7X-aAPe78-aAP9nx-aAP9dc-aAP9ct-aAP2kz-aARJLE-
aANZRe-aARHf1-aARM2u-aARZHw-aAPe9K-aARLX5-aARJSN-aAPhyK-aAS19C-aAP9oe-
aARZWw-aARRR3-aAPe8x-aAPeuc-aARLZQ-aARWRf-aAP9fr-aARHHw-aAP158-aARM3s-
aANZMe-aAP4yz-aAS18o-aARWSm-aAP9qa-aARZS5-aAP4Ae-aAPhmn-aAP9qP.
 Photo 4 (slide 13, Bottom Left): Peris, Eva (2011). Mago//Magician, [photo]. Retrieved May 9,
2014 from: https://www.flickr.com/photos/32347177@N02/5438832695/in/photolist-9hBrtv-
5RBgux-bL7Kdv-51TDfu-fa5HMh-96NbcG-e27Bvu-a1hz6J-bg2E8v-awgUbC-7Ga5SH-e931P1-
7Kq9sd-2fwWyB-e8jgvm-3baXtu-dSyRUv-6H6kY1-6H2h1c-6H6k87-6H2jB2-6H2j6e-6H6nFN-
6H6mud-6H6nk1-6H2ign-6H2hzD-6H2hjt-6H6k2W-6H6nMf-6H6mUf-6H2hHB-6H2jwt-6H6kHq-
6H2jjx-6H2iwZ-6H6kU7-6H2hTM-6H6mJS-6H6mxS-6H6n5L-6H2inn-6H2iMa-6H6m5Y-6H6knU-
ar2YHZ-BuVqR-dUVtDW-8KZnWx-8e8ePb-6H2jFt

18. Photo References
 Photo 5 (slide 13, Bottom Right): Lamsa, Larry, (2010). Dance in Los Alamos, [photo]. Retrieved
May 9, 2014 from: https://www.flickr.com/photos/22191277@N03/5291309693/in/photolist-
94zm2t-ejmnJA-ed931k-a4CxmE-cSoCwh-doXMBm-8C3Euv-9yPefV-dTVrBA-ejmnKN-dTVr2J-
ed93ex-ejmnKA-hUfNe8-6y7vRK-e7CR24-2W8PUG-bacFcZ-4vJEMM-83T3Kw-dTVtMW-ejfDuT-
edeFG1-bacF1B-fefEuJ-9ZS55t-cSoCc5-4ZsuRQ-hUgwwN-e7CQLB-9FJbk8-dTPNtx-94CrbU-
dTPPme-dTPQog-dJrhZj-3ePC8Q-3ePJz5-edeFU7-8Gdzmg-6ycahd-6ogWCV-6y7zkp-4ZooHp-
4ZohZD-e7qxcA-6ybGTm-e82EBJ-cBAQWC-e88YRP-9ySqgE

19. THANK YOU!
Questions? Contact me at laurengjohnson@hotmail.com