preliminary qualitative research

[Trent Shipley]

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Report
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
On 15 March 2005 I spoke briefly to an acquaintance who works in the market=
ing=20
department for one of the major arena's in the Greater Phoenix area about=20
event planning. =20

Internal functions included things like booking, marketing, CAD planning an=
d=20
reconfiguring the arena, ticket pricing, and other activities.  The arena=20
seldom produced or promoted its own events and had no internal "event=20
planner" _per se_. =20

The informant mentioned two salient external roles.  One was the event=20
producer and the other was the (local) event promoter.  The informant thoug=
ht=20
promoters would have a role very similar to marketing campaign or political=
=20
campaign advance teams.  From the informant's perspective, the promoter was=
=20
the individual (or agency) most responsible for an event's success.

When I mentioned that for sound engineering reasons our event planning and=
=20
production automation project "manager" wanted to start interviewing and=20
producing event software for the largest agents involved in events, like=20
arenas, big promoters (especially nationwide), hotel chains, or Walt Disney=
,=20
she was VERY sceptical.  Any agency that successfully produces and promotes=
=20
many large events implicitly has set up an adequate workflow.  If their eve=
nt=20
related workflow were not competitive, they would not have gotten so big. =
=20
Since they HAVE a proven event solution, they will only be interested in=20
proven solutions.  They will not want to waste resources on a risky product.

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Observations
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

=46rom the forgoing it is evident that from the perspective of an arena's=20
marketeers there is an inherent cognitive division between internal and=20
external functions.

This informant saw advance men and local promoters as the critical element =
in=20
"event work".

Though not evident in the above report, there is reason to believe that the=
=20
"event concept" is problematic, at least from the perspective of a large=20
venue like an arena.  The informant did not necessarily think in terms of=20
"events".  At a high level "the event" did not seem to be quite the right=20
concept to capture her idea of a unit of work.  Also she kept going into=20
areas that seemed naturally connected to a unit of work for her, but that=20
seemed tangential to my _a priori_ understanding of "event planning". =20
Examples of these organic tangents include CAD, graphic design, and=20
ticketing.

Besides subjecting potential consumers to research and analysis, the same=20
needs to be done with the workers (volunteers) on the engineering side.  Th=
e=20
function of the analyst is to broker understanding between the consumers an=
d=20
producers in furtherance of product success.  Hopefully, a FOSS project wil=
l=20
provide the opportunity to analyze both parties and facilitate negotiation=
=20
between them.  In commercial settings the analyst tends to be a creature of=
=20
the producer so the analysis focuses on the customer and not on the consume=
r,=20
producer, and the relationship between the two.

Along these lines project engineers would like to design with the largest=20
potential consumers in mind so that the resulting software architecture is =
an=20
exemplar of clean, top-down design.  Unfortunately, there is reason to=20
believe that large prospective consumers may be unwilling to participate in=
=20
the project at this early stage.  Without substantial consumer input it is=
=20
possible to produce a clean top-down design, but it will be very wrong.  It=
=20
is an open question whether iteratively refactoring a perfect design based =
on=20
terribly flawed domain knowledge will ultimately result in any advantage ov=
er=20
alternative approaches, most notably producing software targeted to small=20
consumers first.=20

Some compromise is in order.  Perhaps on the order of designing to suit the=
=20
largest consumer(s) that are willing to participate at this time.

In any event, it seems to me that it is high time for our first in-person=20
project meeting.


=2D-=20
Trent Shipley
Home:602.375.8683
Cell:602.989.9100
mailto:tcshipley@deru.com
http://www.u.arizona.edu/~tshipley