Closing The Number Seven Project

Remember this, and this, and this?

Co-working is a growing trend among mobile professionals and freelancers and there would seem no earthly reason why it wouldn’t work for photographers. Equipment is notoriously expensive, studio space hard to come by, and artist-led galleries few and far between. Early soundings were met with nothing but enthusiasm: great idea; count me in.

So, what went wrong? It’s probably far too early to say, and everyone involved will have their own theories, but here goes:

1. Location
An ordinary domestic property in an ordinary terraced street might have worked as a co-working space if it was in a large town or city. If you’ve got one of those, give it a go. Even with the excellent transport links (5 mins to the A19, excellent cheap buses and regular trains, free parking), this sleepy village feels like it’s miles away from anywhere and indeed that’s an undeniable part of its charm.

It’s also in an area suffering from the effects of industrial decline and with pockets of extreme poverty close by. While that can make for very strong subject matter for an editorial piece, it may not make such a desirable destination for visitors to a gallery.

2. Costs
Do not underestimate day to day expenses, the essential overheads of running even a small operation like this, and do not underestimate the willingness of all concerned to underestimate them. Gas or electricity for heating and lighting, water rates, and a liability for council tax, plus buildings and contents insurance are obviously just the basics. There may also be borrowing to repay on purchase or refurbishment costs. These need to be covered somehow, either by grant aid or by something like a membership fee and charges for occasional use.

If there aren’t enough people involved to cover these costs, or if most of the people involved are impoverished students or in early career, then somewhere, somehow, there’ll be an imbalance. Ultimately the responsibility for costs will be carried by the person or people whose names are on the mortgage or rental agreement. Ten people co-working, regularly using a space, will need to generously budget and split the costs equitably, taking account of the inevitable non-payers and the people who think they really needn’t pay as much because they’re not there quite as often as others. Remarkable really, how often that happens, and it’s quite reasonable for them to have that expectation.

3. Sabotage
The potential for this is minimal, isn’t it? Nobody is ever going to call your photograph ’shite’, let alone a whole portfolio of work. No-one is going to say another’s work is too conventional or too heavily retouched, or boring, are they? Surviving this kind of savage critique might well be possible in a mature organisation, or in a context which includes other supportive and inclusive behaviours, but may pretty much spell the death knell of someone’s participation in a new project, where people are unfamiliar with each other.

4. Management
Confusions about decision-making methods, how to operate democratically, what does and what doesn’t constitute a collective or co-operative, not moving quickly enough to a state where some combination of leadership and management, either stable or in rotation, is effective, and a general inability or unwillingness to make decisions may well be the biggest factors affecting not only day to day operation, but also overall viability.

It cannot be underestimated how unfamiliar people are with working within collective structures. When people are looking at one other to make decisions, and that person is looking back at the group for answers, perhaps nothing happens and people get impatient, or they drift away.

Unfamiliarity with or unwillingness to lead projects, and ineffective internal communication were also key.

5. Stages of Development of a Stable Work Group
The critical path goes: Form, Storm, Norm and Perform (Tuckman and Jensen 1977). There’s a link here from Lancaster University which goes into more detail. Brian Tuckman added Adjourn and Mourn to the categories in 2005 or thereabouts. It’s pretty certain that the Number Seven Project didn’t often get properly into stage one, even with efforts to share meals and outings of various kinds. Creating social cohesion is vital. Occasional forays into the storm stage may make good beginnings if they’re worked through, but many people come unprepared for conflict, and fear or flee even if it’s minimal. It is also unclear whether Brian Tuckman’s theory can apply, if people will be willing to work through the stages, when they’re under no compulsion to work together.

So, not one but a confluence of factors, all or some of the above working together, and undoubtedly there will be more theories, and it’s time to officially call it a day.

Regrets? Not one single minute of it.

There are currently two portfolios of work, and two sets of unframed prints from four photographers in total, plus several sets of work on the walls that will need to be reclaimed as soon as is practical. If these are not collected by three months from today’s date, 1st December 2009, they will be donated to charity.

The darkroom still exists, and the storage and facilities there are being re-organised currently so that there will be more usable space. On a personal level, it will be a relief to get back in there are do some real work. It’s been a while.

Similar Posts:

• How Much is an Undergrad Photography Degree?
• Is Photography Dead?
• Calling Spring
• Captured in Amber – Tyne Tees TV Fri 1st Aug
• Co-working Call!

Popularity: 1% [?]