2.1: Survey Monkey Questions

As well as interviewing my parents, I wanted to see what the general consensus was of other peoples' perceptions of the RSC programmes, and how people, who maybe never have been to the RSC, viewed the progression of the designs.

In hine-sight, I think I directed too much of much of my questions towards the design of the covers, when I should have perhaps kept it more neutral and based around the perception the covers give of the company. Either way, it was interesting to glean whether people noticed a change in the designs, and whether they were positive or otherwise.

Click HERE for a PDF of the results.

Summary and Analysis

The majority of the people who answered the survey were within the 16 - 26 age range, which is within the RSC Key programme they provide (discount tickets etc etc), and there was a good mixture of those who have and haven't been to the RSC before, so the results should have reflected a balance of approach.

Only a small amount had actually bought the programmes before, for various reasons such as the character lists, plot overview, art work or retrospectively of the play. Those that didn't purchase them is because they wanted to avoid spending more money and would research the play before hand.

In comparison of the newer covers to the older ones, most people found them more photographic and experimental, however, the other option of 'more illustrative' was not much different in it's responses. It was obvious that they have become more corporate, but whether this is a good of bad thing was not conclusively decided. An agreement was seen that they appeared more professional and worked as a 'collection' that tied in together well, and possibly the contemporary design appeals to younger audience more. Some stated that the logo is needed to keep the programmes relatable as the designs are so experimental. However, some found this same trait constraining and less appealing, being less inventive and lacking a proper interpretation of the play and the experience involved. But on the whole, the changes noticed were not disagreeable.

This shows that the strong opinions that my Mum had about the newer programmes might have been a one off. Most people liked the format of the modern, corporate programmes, and that they are just as artistic, and could be seen as more of a collection. However, if most people of that age range don't buy programmes anyway, then what is the point? It was split opinion, and there were others expressing the same views of my Mum, and who noticed the same concerns of a lack of appreciation of interpreting the play in as much of an experimental way.

The only thing I could point out is that strong opinions came from the older designs and the new designs remained nonchalant. If the RSC wanted to strike more of a chord, maybe they should try and push the boat out a bit more to at least provoke more of a reaction?