Social Recreational Dance "Industry"

Professionalization

In the growth and development of industries and professions, there is often a professionalization phase.  This is a period of laying, or renovating, the professional-level foundations for the industry going forward.  It's a stage in industry development between the Wild-West, anything goes, phase and the mature phase.

The professionalization phase of an industry is a bit analogous to post-teenage or post-puberty - at the end of the late childhood years and a part of beginning maturity.

Professionalization is critical to successful development of an industry; an industry which has aged but not become successfully professionalized is an industry which is a lot more amateurish and of less stature and lower respect than an industry which has become successfully professionalized.

Some important parts of social recreational dance industry are in professionalization phase; and it is steadily moving ahead and gaining ground. Some parts of social recreational dance industry are already successfully professionalized; and some parts were, but had lost ground due to various circumstances, and are now re-gaining some good yardage.

If the social recreational dance industry were not already in the process of ongoing professionalizing, I would, at the same time I'm calling for development of the business side through a strong industry/trade association, also be calling for more industry focus on professionalizing.

"The Commons" principle

The principle of "the commons" has been interpreted and applied in many ways; concretely, abstractly, and metaphorically.  Anything shared "in common" can be considered as "a commons".

In the social-recreational dance industry, I see the issues of "quality" and "bad behavior" as very important elements of the commons of social-recreational dance.

The principle of the commons begins with "the tragedy of the commons"; which in general can be interpreted as the observation that a commons is used by many, will be abused by some, and eventually can be diminished or even ruined for all.  The "environment" (of pretty much anything) is an example of a commons.

The principle of the commons is that, to avoid the tragedy, some attempt must be made to reduce abuse, or overuse, of the commons.

In any industry or profession, matters of "the commons" are a key reason for the initiation, development, support and sustenance of industry/trade associations, professional associations, credentialing, and professionalization.

"Public goods" principle

"Public goods" is a term from the field of Economics and includes such things as freeways and national defense.  Basically a public good in the narrow context is something that doesn't make economic sense for a private enterprise to provide; a private firm will build toll-roads, but does not see feasibility in building freeways.  In general, public goods are provided by public enterprises.  The concept of public goods, like the commons, and many related terms and concepts, has also been vastly extended and applied in many ways.

In the context of an industry, the industry superstructure and infrastructure are the public goods of the industry. It's what is needed by all, but is not feasibly provided by one.

In the social-recreational dance industry, I see the "public goods" as the industry elements discussed in earlier posts as normally being provided by industry/trade associations:  industry meetings, forums, conventions, business education, trade shows, trade publications.

In any industry or profession, matters of "public goods" are a key reason for the initiation, development, support and sustenance of industry/trade associations and professional associations.

Public goods and the commons

A key distinction I'm making between "public goods" and "the commons" is to use public goods as referring to the development and sustained provision of something, and the principle of the commons as referring to the use of it; like the development of public highways versus the commons use of them.

Principle of the commons is about downside risk

In the commons we have something to lose.  In paying attention to the principle of the commons, we want to reduce downside risk.

For example, in regard to the commons elements of "quality" and "bad behavior", the "all-it-takes-is-one" principle applies here:  all the high quality, and all the good behavior in the world, can't really offset the negative impact of the single seriously bad offender. 

And it's always a risk-waiting-to-happen.  When/after it happens, it's too late.  Ooops.

We can see in the news the disastrous results of one industry or another which did not do an adequate job of maintaining their commons, and subsequently lost millions/billions as a result of as little as one bad apple; or one avoidable mistake.

Principle of public goods is about upside gain

In public goods we have something to gain.  In paying attention to the principle of public goods, we want to increase upside opportunity and payoff.

Industry superstructure and infrastructure pays off.  Period.  For everyone.

Commons issues do appear in the news, public goods don't

Goofs, slips, "Oh no's", are newsworthy.  They impact public image negatively.  The commons contains the dreaded domain of drama.

OTOH in the matter of public goods, doing business as we are expected to do is not newsworthy.

OTOOH (on the other-other hand), if an industry does not provide public goods for itself, it usually becomes such an inconsequential industry that, even if a disaster occurs in it, no one even cares; no one notices.

Better to be sufficiently consequential to be able to be brought down, than to be so unimportant that there is no more 'down' to go.  How's that as an argument for providing public goods?   

More successful equals more exposed

The more successful you are, the more impacted you may be by matters of the commons and public goods.

If you are one of the leaders in an industry, you "represent" the industry; much more than your proportional size/success would warrant.

If you are the industry leader, you are basically the "face" of the industry: the "public face" of it. And for the public that is not aware of others in the industry, you are the industry, not just a component of it.

You gain more. At the same time, you have more to lose in terms of downside risk.

What would be possible with strong industry association that isn't possible without one?

A strong industry association makes many things possible that are not feasible/possible without it.

A strong industry association makes it possible to reduce downside risk.

A strong industry association makes it possible to increase upside potential and opportunity. 

A strong industry association makes it possible to accomplish many important initiatives that no individual enterprise could/would/should take on.