cole-ross-moneyworries-postprint.pdf

◆ 503

N o handbook on research methodologies would be complete with-out at least a nod to money matters. But because the “starving

artist” phenomenon is just as apt a description of researchers who vari-ously incorporate the arts into their work, we did not see ourselves writ-ing a guide to successful procurement of pots of money; nor did weimagine writing an issues-based essay on the “whys,” “wherefores,” and“whethers” of seeking funding for alternative genre research.1 Rather,we were more interested in getting a sense of the overall funding picturein the small but growing international community of artist-researchers.

Although we both have had some success in finding money to supportour arts-related projects, we came to our first planning meeting worried.Did we know enough about funding issues to write this chapter?Acquiring funding is a struggle, and the pathways we have chosen havenot always been straightforward or easy. The rejections have been many.Maybe other social scientists have strategies that work better? Maybefunding is more accessible in other countries? Surely somebody else mustknow the secrets to making money flow on demand.

43MONEY WORRIES

Tackling the Challenges of Funding Arts-Related Research

� Ross Gray and Ardra L. Cole

43- Knowles (Handbook)-45358.qxd 10/3/2007 2:12 PM Page 503

504–––◆–––Issues and Challenges

We sent out a call for help via e-mail, ask-ing what strategies others have used to try togarner support for their projects. Would theyshare with us their rejections and successes,along with comments they have receivedfrom reviewers? We heard back from 22researchers from around the world, most ofthem prolific scholars and seasoned veteransin linking research and the arts.2 It wasquickly apparent that we were not alone inour struggles to find funding. We read manycomments and stories that revealed anunwelcoming political and academic contextslow to flow funds to support arts-relatedresearch. Below are three examples of suchcomments from our respondents.

Funding is extremely hard to find. Thefederal government mostly only fundsquantitative or mixed method designstudies, and private corporations havebeen hit hard by the recession.

We have a system here where large grantrequests that may be attractive sourcesfor faculty go to centralized universitycommittees in a pre-proposal evaluation.The university then selects which facultycan apply for funding. I have never beenselected to submit my work, and the rea-sons are always tied to comments like“This is interesting scholarship but notresearch” and “How will you measureimprovements?”

We were thrilled to be invited to make aspecial presentation to the fundingagency. This was a really big team grant,and they’d short-listed us and expressedinterest in our arts[-related] approaches.But our expectations for being wellreceived were misplaced. We dramatizedour introductory remarks, trying to spicethings up and make the presentation con-sistent with our program of innovation.It was about the worst audience you

could hope for. Not a flicker of responseacross their impassive faces. And then thesame old questions started in a consis-tently hostile tone. The underlying ques-tion was whether this should be countedas real research. We were there for overan hour, but we knew after 10 minutesthat they had no intention of funding us.

So this is where we begin—with theacknowledgement that funding is a chal-lenge. We could go on for a long time in thischapter about this hard luck reality, moanand complain with complete justification.But we choose to move on to a considera-tion of how alternative genre researchershave been able to survive, sometimes thrive,in a predominantly hostile environment. Thereare lessons to be learned. And positive changesin the making.

♦♦ Bringing in the Money

One of the strategies commonly describedby researchers incorporating the arts intotheir work is diverting funds from otherresearch projects or nonresearch sources.For example, “We’re now using a littlefunding from an actual community projectto assist with our research work.”

Sometimes researchers use money from aconventional research project to supporttheir more innovative work. One of ourrespondents finally succeeded in obtainingfunding for a project by including it “as partof a very large proposal where the arts [-related] details were well hidden.” Otherresearchers conducted conventional proj-ects but then communicated findingsthrough the arts without asking their fun-ders for permission. For example

I’ve always couched my research propos-als in terms of conventional social


Money Worries–––◆–––505

science—it’s only the written end-productsthat have taken on fictional or otheralternative forms. As long as there’s aconventional academic report as well,the funding agencies don’t care.

Researchers wrote to us about beingstrategic about which competitions theydecided to enter. One person commented, “Igo around the system by applying for smallgrants.” Others reported getting most of theirsupport within their academic institutions andavoiding seeking external funds where theythought the odds of success were low. Forexample, “at the department and collegelevels I’ve been able to generate some researchdollars, but for the most part the corporateand foundation grantors are hesitant to give money for arts-based research.” Someresearchers keep their expectations for fund-ing low, pursuing only the avenues thatseemed most promising. “Generally, we don’tapply for many grants or get much money.We tend to only apply where we think peoplewill be sympathetic to our approaches.”

Several respondents noted that they hadbeen able to be more successful in obtainingfunds as time went on and they developeda reputation for their work. They stressed theimportance of creating a context where peoplecontrolling money can feel safe in investing inarts-related projects. For example

My motto is to persevere, and when I getturned down, I learn from it and tryagain. It helps to start small, have somesuccess, and build incrementally. Peoplerespond well to completing research anddisseminating it. Once you have a record,it is easier to get the funding.

Another said

Track record is the number one concernfor reviewers. So as long as you candemonstrate that you have had success in

obtaining funding and are a productivescholar, they seem more willing to sup-port you. Going back to the same agencyalso seems helpful. If they awarded youbefore and you produced “good results,”they seem inclined to want to build onthat.

Given that the major pots of researchmoney are often not easily accessible to arts-related researchers, there sometimes mayneed to be a greater reliance on the goodwill of individuals who control smaller potsof money and exercise power. One of ourrespondents described how important it isto cultivate such relationships.

X provides most of the money for mywork. So I thank him by name in anypublications, give him copies of my pub-lications with his name highlighted,invite him to my performances, keep himinformed of how the productions went,who and how many attended, where itwas presented, etc.

Several of the researchers who wrote tous noted that they had received funds fromprivate foundations. Although foundationsvary in size and mode of operation, they aremore likely than scientific research organi-zations to be controlled by one or a fewindividuals. One respondent described howhe pursued a wealthy patron over manymonths, sending her written materials andvideotapes, phoning her at the odd hours sherequested, and staging a special performancefor the benefit of her and her family. Whenshe eventually provided a smaller-than-hoped-for donation, the researcher was cha-grined to overhear her laughing comment toa colleague that she gave the money because“he was such a good beggar.”

One enterprising research team consis-tently approached local individuals andorganizations for support for arts-related



projects. After seemingly exhausting thisstrategy, they decided to raise the stakes.

We wrote a list of all agencies, membersof health services and government officeswho hadn’t contributed or supported ourhealth promotion research and thenleaked it to a friendly news agency. Eachindividual and agency was approachedwith the potential of their non-supportof our work being made public, and surprise, surprise most of them madegood. . . . It isn’t something we’d advisetrying more than once.

Most of the researchers who wrote tous did not attempt to secure private sectorfunding for their work. Several did explorethe possibilities and were successful, but notwithout some harrowing experiences alongthe way. One researcher described how hehad to turn down the requests of pharma-ceutical company representatives to insertthe names of their cancer drugs into dra-matic scripts. And how he subsequentlyended up in the middle of a controversywhere sponsoring pharmaceutical compa-nies attempted to set up product displays atpublic performances against the wishes oflocal support groups. And then there wasthe following scenario from another respon-dent, likely much more entertaining to readabout than to live through.

We got a major brewery to provide fund-ing for our research into clinical experi-ences of alcohol abuse. They providedfree alcohol for the intermissions and werekeen to promote a safe-drinking message.On the other hand, and not surprisingly,the health agencies dealing with alcoholrecovery temporarily withdrew theirsupport for the project. The local policeservices became the circuit breaker—giving penalty-free alcohol breath tests toaudience members and showing how alco-hol-impaired individuals believed they’d

not drunk enough to be over the safe limit.Health agencies provided counseling adviceand health information literature duringthese intermission events.

♦♦ Paying Our Own Way

Although many of the researchers we heardfrom found ways to access project money,others did most of the financing themselves,or were able to do their work without muchfinancial expenditure. Sometimes the costs ofbeing funded, including threats to artisticintegrity, outweighed the benefits of support.

One reviewer wanted there to be a moreupbeat ending to the tragic stories [of theparticipants]. Was I to rewrite/fabricatean upbeat ending to the play or keep thedrama as it really happened to these ado-lescents? I opted for the latter.

Securing external funding most ofteninvolves having to wait a considerable timefor project implementation. Researchershave to balance the satisfaction of movingthe creative process forward with the possi-ble implications for their own pocketbooks.

Out of pocket costs for one project weredue to me not thinking far enough inadvance. This taught me not to be toospontaneously “inspired” and to not tryand work too quickly to put up an arts-based research project, but to plan atleast 18 months in advance.

A few researchers wrote that they had nofunding for their projects, but that this wasnot a problem for them due to other positivecircumstances.

I have neither sought nor receivedresearch funding. I have been fortunateto have had support from publishersover the years, and all of my art-based



research is the basis for what I do in mybooks, essays, lectures, etc.

One researcher felt that she could neverhave undertaken her arts-related project ifshe had been in a full-time academic posi-tion, where it would have been difficult tofind both funding and time for the work.But she nevertheless found it ironic that shewas unpaid for her labor.

I was unpaid as the primary person devel-oping the exhibit. So, here I was goingaround the country talking about howodd it was that my mother made wed-ding dresses over 50 years for about $500total . . . And I was, with every step, mir-roring those same relations. It was theonly way of getting the work done. I wasin a couple relationship at the time andwould not have been able to make thisgrand gesture outside of that financialcontext.

Sometimes researchers’ need to createtook precedence over the material condi-tions of their labor. They did what theyneeded to do to support their creative processand lived as best they could while they weredoing it.

I did most of my early work, and muchof my most interesting work, while liv-ing for seven years in a microscopic, onebedroom rented condo with peelingpaint, temperamental plumbing, and anoven that didn’t work. Steinbeck stuff.

While it is unfortunate that more financialsupport is not available, artist-researchersoften go into debt with their wide eyes open,preferring to pay their own way than tocompromise their work or turn away fromwhat they most want to achieve.

I went into debt for about two years bypaying for our project. The total cost ofthe project was $25,000 . . . I do plan on

funding another project like this in thefuture with my own money. I don’tknow if the projects will ever pay offin any monetary value, but it will giveme personal satisfaction in pursuing mydreams in higher education.

Another commented

Often the costs cannot be anticipated oreasily described to fit budget lines or justi-fication required by funding agencies soyou do end up out-of-pocket a lot. Havingsaid that, however, it is also true that inour first large (and successful) grant pro-posal we included a budget for shopping,studio space, construction materials, etc.

♦♦ Things Are Getting Better

Although the environment for arts-relatedresearch has been predominantly difficult,there are signs that this is changing, at leastin some circumstances. Many individualsusing arts-related approaches to researchhave been able to develop their own pro-grams over time, building a sense of cre-dibility for themselves and for the field. “I have now gained a credible research rep-utation within my college and am given anannual research/creative activity budget formy work.”

I was heartened when a reviewer of one of my grant proposals made a point ofacknowledging my “success” in usingarts-based methods to challenge the statusquo in qualitative research methodology.

With the visible growth of arts-relatedresearch over the past decade, institutionaladministrators are more likely to see alter-native genre work as legitimate, sometimesresulting in their fair-minded support ofindividual scholars.

43- Knowles (Handbook)-45358.qxd 10/3/2007 2:12 PM 07


The recent chairs of our department, aswell as the dean, have been fairly respon-sive to the case I’ve made that alternativeresearch in the social sciences doesn’thave access to the financial largesse available to science, math, etc., and sorequires institutional support.

One researcher described her experience at a recent qualitative, arts-focused researchconference in Georgia, commenting how shebecame aware that there is now a generationof successful arts-influenced researchers avail-able to mentor students. And a collectivetrack record of funded projects and publica-tions has been laid down over time, estab-lishing the legitimacy of the field, and makingit much more possible for up and comingresearchers to be competitive for funds.

There also have been some remarkablesuccesses in recent times, where arts-informedresearchers have secured major funding frommainstream scientific organizations. One ofus (Ardra with coresearcher Maura McIntyre)received a large grant to tour an exhibitrelated to Alzheimer’s disease across Canada,gathering new data along the way. The sec-ond phase of the project also received sub-stantial funding from the same social scienceresearch funding agency. The other (Ross)received funding from a very conservativecancer research organization to evaluate aresearch-based drama about issues facingcouples after prostate cancer treatment. Andat the Centre for Arts-Informed Research atthe University of Toronto, with which we areboth affiliated, several graduate students andpostdoctoral researchers have received exter-nal funding to develop arts-related researchprograms. Such stories are islands of hope in the larger sea of unfriendliness. But everyyear there are more such stories/islands. Willreports like the ones below ever become commonplace?

I was largely unsuccessful in receivinggrants for arts-based and creative research

projects. Then we received two grants.What is really amazing to me is that afterso much rejection, the reviews for boththese successful grants were glowing.

In our most recent successful large-scalefunding award one reviewer describedour “demonstrated commitment to inno-vative ways of dissemination” as “themajor strength of the proposal.”

♦♦ What Can Be Done?

How can the momentum that is building for arts-related research continue to grow?What are some steps that will lead to greateracceptance from peers and funders, and thatwill provide easier access to money necessaryfor this work? Here are our best guesses:

• The efforts at networking that have been developing among artist-researchers need to continue andintensify so that researchers can learnfrom each other and create moregroup visibility. A strong chorus has abetter chance of being heard louderand further than several solo voices.

• At conferences, in written correspon-dence and publications, and in every-day interactions within faculties andinstitutions, artist-researchers need to promote the importance and rele-vance of alternative genre research.

• Research units/organizations with an explicit focus on the integration of research and the arts make arts-related research visible and viablewithin academic and research institu-tions. The art-research communityneeds more such structures.

• Experienced artist-researchers haveimportant roles in shaping future deci-sion making via serving on grant



review panels, tenure and promotioncommittees, student award commit-tees, editorial boards, and so on. Theacceptance of alternative genre researchis linked to the willingness and com-mitment of senior faculty to advocatewithin formal structures/processes.

• Organizations/institutions concernedwith arts and research (such as theSociety for Arts in Health Care or theArts-Based Educational Research SpecialInterest Group or AERA) could producedocuments that detail processes, stan-dards, agreements, and values thatinform the work of artist-researchers.Similarly, artist-researchers could make acommitment to publishing works thatfocus on epistemological and methodolog-ical issues associated with arts-relatedresearch. The existence of such docu-ments will help to provide greater legiti-macy for researchers seeking approval forresearch proposals and ethics protocols.

• Building on their successes, experi-enced artist-researchers could developgrant-writing workshops to informstudents and new scholars, as well as funding organizations, about howarts-related research is conducted,how it can be articulated clearly, andwhy/how it should be funded.

• Artist-researchers, particularly thosewho have had success with fundingagencies, could advocate for specialcompetitions that focus on the linkagebetween research and the arts.

♦♦ Wrapping Up

We believe there will be better times aheadfor artist-researchers seeking funding for their

work. As noted above, there are encouragingsigns and a strengthening momentum gener-ated by first-wave social scientists. It is evenpossible to imagine a day when arts-relatedresearch could be a fully accepted and rou-tinely funded feature of mainstream socialscience. We want to pause, however, and con-sider the price of too much success. Drawn aswe are to the fringes and to the excitement ofmaking things appear out of thin air, we arewell aware of the significant disadvantagesassociated with becoming mainstream.Nipping at the heels of institutional accep-tance are demands for standardization andother regulatory measures of proof that havethe potential to undermine the creative thrustof arts-related work. We thus seek a perfectbalance in which systemic structures supportour work but do not infringe too much onthe creative process and the excitement ofartistic work. Perhaps we ask too much?

♦♦ Notes

1. We recommend Julianne Cheek’s (2000)chapter, “An Untold Story? Doing FundedQualitative Research,” in the Handbook ofQualitative Research for both guidelines and anexcellent discussion of issues related to fundingof qualitative research.

2. We thank those who so generously sharedwith us their stories, strategies, and standpoints.

♦♦ References

Cheek, J. (2000). An untold story? Doingfunded qualitative research. In N. K.Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook ofqualitative research (2nd ed., p. 401–420).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


cole-ross-moneyworries-postprint.pdf

Documents