External influences and the future

The consequences of Covid-19 pandemic touched all the studied dance companies just like other operators of live cultural events: performances and tours were cancelled or postponed, or when performing was allowed, the number of spectators was strongly restricted – and fundraising through own income collapsed. The performers needed to be tested on daily basis and when one of them got sick or exposed to Covid-19, the performances – or rehearsals towards it – were cancelled again. The workload of re-organizing, re-planning and re-rehearsing for possible future performances increased drastically and demanded constant adapting to changing circumstances. Two of the studied dance companies also needed to lay off personnel.

113 However, unlike freelancers without governmental support for their losses at that point, the dance companies as organisations still had their operational or state subsidies and could obtain some extra subsidies to cover damages caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. By the time of the interviews, the financial situations of the studied dance companies, especially of those with wider financial base for funding from various sources, were considered fairly good compared to the overall situation of the cultural scene. The worries that puzzled the interviewees were concentrating on how to build a path out of the Covid-19 situation and how to cover the reduction of public funding for dance in the near future. Similarly, the dance companies struggled to keep the connection to the audience during these exceptional times and wondered when people will find their way back to live performances or when festivals can order performances again or how to keep their personnel through these difficult times.

Nevertheless, Covid-19 pandemic also activated the dance companies to do things differently and develop new concepts. For instance, Dance Theatre Hurjaruuth streamed performances, organised circus classes via Zoom application and created a worldwide festival venue using Zoom as a platform (LK), Kinetic Orchestra prepared teaching material and finished choreographies without knowing when they will be performed (JM), and Pori Dance Company started digitalizing operations (ML). To overcome Covid-19 restrictions for theatres, Minimi created a production called Kävelykino (Walking Cinema): an outside city walk, with a radio play and three stops of short dance movies, by using headphones and participators’

own phones (MM).

As another positive thing, Covid-19 pandemic woke up some dance companies to realise that they actually are able to make very quick changes in plans, the overall flexibility to do things another way and adapt to changing situations increased, and perhaps that should stay to some extent also in the future. Likewise, Covid-19 restrictions showed that the dance companies need to include into their operations additional other activities than traditional live performances, develop unique co- operational models and new digital services also in the future.

114 Moreover, after the first chaotic period, Covid-19 pandemic forced the dance companies to stop and re-think their ways of working and fundraising. The estimated reductions of public funding based on the losses of the state-owned gaming company Veikkaus were very well acknowledged and the need for fundraising from other sources was recognised. It seemed that this situation together with the interviews, which sometimes grew into deeper discussions, functioned as activators to re-think each dance company’s possibilities to develop own methods for fundraising.

“This situation is a chance for reforms, we need to reflect our activities…we are so used to our models that sometimes we just forget that also these fundraising ideas could be developed, but it is a question of resources – work, time and personnel…”

(ML)

Co-operation in its various forms was mentioned by several interviewees as a future approach to develop the organisation and its fundraising: co-operation with bigger theatres, co-operation between dance companies, co-operation between dance, circus, theatres and other organisations on horizontal level, networking with a variety of operators to share costs, spaces, venues, equipment as well as on EU-level to raise funds internationally through collaborations. Openness to share information and experience was needed – to ‘spar’ each other for developing unique co-operational models with municipalities, businesses and other organisations. In addition, help for articulating these developed ideas to different stakeholders was wished. Recycling materials, sharing equipment and venues as well as planning future tours in a more environmentally friendly way were regarded as not only co- operational fund savings but also as more sustainable way of living.

At the time of the interviews, Dance House Helsinki raised contradictory feelings.

After the joy of finally getting a house dedicated to dance in Finland, it was realised that its operational model as a space renting production house would be too expensive for independent dance makers or even some dance companies to use. It was also considered underlining the division between dance makers in Helsinki and

‘outside of the ring road III’: the ‘outsiders’ felt that the ‘insiders’ were not interested in knowing about or seeing the dance art of the ‘outsiders’, and therefore it would

115 still stay difficult for the ‘outsiders’ to perform in Helsinki, despite the new venue.

On the other hand, Dance House Helsinki was seen important since it would bring up dance into discussions of higher political level, which was wished to benefit fundraising of dance scene as a whole.

This study confirms, that despite the heavy negative effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on the whole cultural scene, it also shook up the dance companies to initiate new digital functions and to re-think their ways of working, including fundraising. In the time of crisis, a wide financial base for funding was understood beneficial and co-operation on multiple levels was highly valuated. Sustainability measures of operations as a part of fund saving had not been actively discussed in the studied dance companies. However, recycling materials was already considered typical for dance companies and touring in the future was planned to be organised in a more sustainable way – for instance, instead of single gigs, planning a touring route, and instead of flying, using a train when possible. Sharing resources collectively was also considered as an ecological way of living and financially a reasonable act to do.

116

5 CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION

Having presented and analysed the research outcomes partly with quite detailed examples, this chapter focuses on reviewing the main findings on a more general level. The main results of the research are summarised and discussed in relation to the research questions, thematic framework, and wider context with concluding remarks. The varying conceptions of the term ‘fundraising’ are reviewed in chapter 5.1. Chapter 5.2 discourses the dance companies’ organisational models, budgets, and their impact on fundraising. Main learnings and good practises of private fundraising applied by the dance companies are introduced in chapter 5.3, followed by discussion of Finnish cultural policy and the role of public and private funding for dance in chapter 5.4. After presenting some managerial implications in section 5.5, suggestions for further research are offered in section 5.6.