aceUVi

and sense the audience, thereby being able to shape the strategies of artistic conviction
and seduction’.
The ‘ability’ component of the IAN model reflects the artist’s skill in the work’s
execution. It is thus roughly equivalent to Boerner’s ‘performance quality’. While
the standards against which ‘ability’ is judged are neither arbitrary nor entirely
subjective, Hannah et al point out that they are not entirely fixed either and may
change over time.
Finally, ‘necessity’ refers to ‘the relation to the audience, to the surroundings, to
the society in which the work of art is performed’. Whereas ‘intention’ and ‘ability’
focus largely on the supply side of the encounter, ‘necessity’ captures the context
and the reception of the work.
The three components of the IAN model are depicted as vectors, moving outward
from a common point of origin. They point in different directions and cannot
simply be summed; the relative lengths of the arrows shed light on the nature of
the work. For instance, an amateur theatre group might have high intentions (represented
as a long ‘I’ arrow), but be short on ability, and if the actors are primarily
motivated by their own desire to perform, there may also be little necessity for
the work (ie, a short N arrow). The arrows for a slightly better amateur ensemble
might be longer, but maintain the same proportional relations.
Hannah et al recognise that some organisations and works of art pursue social
aims; however, they refuse to integrate such considerations in their quality
framework. As they argue,
... certain performances do not aim for artistic quality but instead strive to fill a
social function [or] entertain a certain audience … This is of course perfectly legitimate,
but these criteria should not be confused with artistic quality.
Hannah et al developed the IAN model to inform local cultural policy in Aarhus,
Denmark, where the municipality wished to review and evaluate its funding for
performing arts organisations. It is thus intended to provide a basis for funding
decisions, and spur organisations towards internal assessments.
Like Tobias, Hannah et al draw on expert opinions in their assessment of organisational
quality and comparisons with other organisations are explicitly desired.
The IAN evaluations are to be completed by ‘professionals with artistic insight,’ of
which at least two are to work on any given assessment. These expert judgments
are to be complemented by self-assessments and written up in an eight to ten page
report.
CREATIVE CAPACITY OF AN ORGANISATION 112
UNDERSTANDING the value and impacts of cultural experiences