Capacity building and professional development in contemporary music careers: An Australian contemporary music case study

Abstract

This paper examines capacity building and professional development in Western Australia’s contemporary popular music sector. It reports on a mixed-methods qualitative-quantitative study into the lived experiences and needs of musicians and industry practitioners alike. It examines learning which is undertaken outside of formal education settings, and includes conferencing, one-on-one mentorship and other workshop based modes of delivery. As is reported, participants are overall positive about their experiences when engaging in such activities however several barriers exist as they relate to the required investments of time and money, modes of delivery and the focus of specific opportunities. A range of recommendations are made in order to address these barriers and support a diversification within the capacity building and professional development space.

Introduction

This paper explores barriers to entry as they relate to capacity building and professional development opportunities for musicians and industry practitioners who work in the contemporary popular music sector in Western Australia. It considers a range of professional development and learning approaches including conferences and mentorship programmes within the context of ongoing professional development for musicians and industry practitioners who are otherwise not engaged in formal music and music business education opportunities. As is examined, while participants are overall positive about their experiences of engaging with such opportunities, a range of barriers and possibilities are present, which have the possibility to limit the capacity for lasting careers. A range of recommendations are offered regarding diversification of offerings as well as financial support which have the potential to offset these barriers. It is contextualised within research and associated debates into the nature of music careers – notably the portfolio career configuration (Bartleet et al., 2012, 2020, Bartlett & Tolmie, 2018) – and the importance of professional networks and associated supports to career development and sustainability (Ballico, 2015, 2020; Whitney et al., 2021).

Following an overview of the research context and the nature of careers in music, a literature review then examines contemporary debates and understandings regarding mentorship and professional development in music careers. An overview of the Western Australian contemporary music sector is provided with a focus not only on its structure and function, but the educational opportunities offered in and for the contemporary music sector. A mixed methods approach was used to gather data and the findings here place a particular focus on the barriers and possibilities which exist in relation to the capacity building and professional development opportunities in this sector. This paper concludes with a list of recommendations of how to support diverse and accessible professional development opportunities. We note that while this research is focused on experiences in a particular geographical locale – and particularly one notable for its geographical isolation – they have implications for similar sectors around the world, owing to the global nature of contemporary music careers and the importance of local music scenes in the development and sustention of careers in music (Ballico, 2021; Johansson & Bell, 2012; Straw, 1991).

Research context and the nature of careers in music

The research reported here was undertaken on behalf of the West Australian State Government’s Department for Local Government Sport and Cultural Industries (DLGSC). It was initiated following the allocation of AUD 3,000,000 to establish a Contemporary Music Fund ¹ and in consultation with an industry roundtable who identified that professional development and mentorship opportunities in the state’s contemporary music sector needed targeted financial support. As such, this study sought to understand the current scope of offerings, the experiences of engaging in such opportunities, support needs in order to assist in their functioning and as is our focus here, the barriers for engaging with them. As is explored in greater detail in our literature review, such an approach to learning provides vital support for musicians and industry practitioners as they traverse their careers. Additionally, providing financial support to the music sector is vital to supporting musicians and practitioners who often work in what is known as a portfolio career configuration. Musicians and industry practitioners engage a high level of entrepreneurialism and adaptability alongside substantive investments of time and money in order to succeed in a portfolio career. A portfolio career, whereby a range of roles are undertaken consecutively and concurrently so as to be financially and creatively sustained, requires a range of career development strategies to be engaged, most notably networking and informal peer learning – in order to successfully support the diversification of their careers (Bartleet et al., 2012, 2020). Musicians who engage in portfolio careers utilise proactive and reactive strategies to the generation of work activities, with a significant amount of professional work being derived from freelance or self-employed contract situations (Whitney et al., 2021). As Bartleet et al. (2012) and Bartlett and Tolmie (2018) note, the musicians’ portfolio of work is shown to feature a significant portion of work embedded outside of the music sector. This could include roles in production, or arts administration. Whitney et al. (2020) highlights how the inclusion of a developed professional network is an “important career attribute for creative workers such as musicians” (p. 5). Adequately supporting networking and informal peer learning is therefore a crucial component to being able to support diverse and sustainable careers in music.

Mentoring and professional development in music careers

Mentoring is recognised as a useful way to support learning and develop skills (Keel, 2009; Labin, 2017). As a specialised form of professional development adopted across a range of fields and professions, mentoring encompasses various approaches and techniques, including both formal and informal mentor–mentee arrangements. Formal mentoring involves engaging with structured mentoring programmes, whereby a mentor and mentee are partnered for a specific purpose and/or period, with the expectation of achieving specific, agreed-upon outcomes. Informal mentoring sits outside such structured programmes but still involves a range of skills-sharing and learning opportunities. As Labin (2017) puts forth, informal mentoring arrangements can involve skill-specific mentors (developing specific skills), situational mentors (providing support in specific situations) and role-model mentors (imparting tacit skills), who may not always be aware that they are providing this guidance. Across mentoring arrangements, mutually beneficial relationships are key as a mismatch between the mentor and mentee will not result in a successful outcome for either participant. In addition, it is important that the mentor be appropriately skilled and experienced to support the mentee in their required skills development. In reflecting on formal mentor programmes specifically, Labin (2017) explains that failures can occur as a result of poor alignment between the mentor and mentee, a lack of programme champions or the inability of programmes to be sustainable and scalable to support ongoing engagement and required growth.

Over the past two decades, formal and informal mentoring has come to be recognised within the Australian music industry as a way through which musicians and industry practitioners can develop their networks, look to engage in new activities and explore possible new career pathways. Recent research (cf Ballico, 2020; Bartleet et al., 2020) specific to the Western Australian and Australian music sectors respectively reveal the significant role of, and need for, mentoring programmes and opportunities for supporting the development and sustaining of music careers. Considering the importance of mentorship more broadly, other research reveals its need owing to the ways in which musicians traverse their careers and, significantly, learn and hone their craft. As Hughes et al. (2013) explore, in regard to contemporary notions of career success in Australian music, many contemporary musicians do not pursue tertiary training courses, and that modern markers of success can incorporate musical ability, business acumen as well as strategic planning. Considering careers in relation to the notion of a ‘portfolio’ of roles, Bartleet et al. (2012) cite the need for “disciplinary agility, social networking capability, creative enterprise and career self-management” (p. 8). They refer to the notion of an adaptive career identity, where artists continue to evolve, self-manage and reinvent their ability to work in a variety of shifting and challenging roles. Comparatively, research by Hennekam et al. (2019) provides some interesting data on the use of online communities by women composers to support their career development, finding that such communities “provided them with a substitute for “real life” mentors” (p. 16) with these online groups providing “support, encouragement, inspiration and guidance” (p. 20) alongside the development of new skills, critical feedback and networking opportunities. This is paralleled in the research of Everts et al. (2021), whose investigation into the work activities of early career Dutch musicians revealed the range of management and business activities they undertake. Local conditions and technological platforms enable musicians to undertake tasks they would have relied on the industry for previously, with Do-It-Yourself (DIY) and “entrepreneurial approaches common among early-career musicians” (p. 100). Threadgold’s (2018) investigation into facets of DIY music careers across cities on Australia’s east coast highlights artists embracing uncertainty and insecurity, with the sense of creativity and community driving their actions in the scene.

Engaging with industry-based workshops, masterclasses and mentorship programmes is one method for musicians to find ways to enhance their skills and understanding of business processes and strategic planning. These industry opportunities can often combine artistic development, networking opportunities and professional business development concepts. Opportunities on offer to musicians and industry practitioners in Western Australia – and explored in this study – primarily fall into the four following categories:

1. Projects submitted to funding agencies: Musicians can apply to state or federal funding programmes, designing personal projects that focus on artistic and business development.

2. Attendance at industry conferences: These conferences are most prominently run by music advocacy bodies within Australia and commercial events bodies overseas.

3. Attendance at specific online or face to face masterclasses: National artist rights associations and state produce music advocacy bodies run a series of workshops covering a range of creative and business elements such as co-writing, storytelling, live streaming music, mental health, public relations and many other industry relevant topics

4. Selection in a curated mentorship programme: A range of national mentorship programmes are operated around the country which engage selective entry and provide recipients with curated mentorship opportunities related to their skillset.

Engagement with such programmes is further supplemented by interactions within social networks and informal peer learning. These interactions influence the ways in which musicians and industry practitioners learn about how to navigate the vagaries of the sector, how to undertake specific business and creative activities (such as planning a tour or recording an album) and, in a broad sense navigate their careers (Ballico, 2015; Green, 2017; Johansson & Bell, 2012, p. 222). Importantly, while social networks and peer learning are highly valued in Western Australia’s contemporary music sector, they are not immune to the challenges and limitations that result from in-group/out-group biases, perceptions of nepotism and the inability for all members to engage equally. Structured mentoring opportunities and programmes have the potential to offset this, and ultimately facilitate a more inclusive and supportive industry.

The WA contemporary music sector: Structure, function and learning opportunities

Recognised as being home to one of the most geographically isolated music scenes in the world (Ballico, 2013), Western Australian musicians and industry practitioners are provided with a unique environment in which to create and sustain their music careers. On the one hand, the local sector operates like any other – with infrastructure such as music venues, recording studios and supportive local music media and an ecosystem of workers engaged in a diverse set of roles such as musician, artist manager, live music promoter, sound engineer, music producer and venue manager. While on the other hand, the sector is influenced, both positively and negatively as a result of the isolation of and within the state.

The state’s isolation is evidenced through its population spread, with a density of 1.02 people for every square kilometre. This is despite the state being the fourth most populated in the country (with 2.6 million residents) and Perth being the fifth most populated capital city in Australia (Ballico & Carter, 2018). Furthermore, Perth is closer to cities in Indonesia (such as Bali 2,625 kilometres away), than it is to the nearest Australian capital city of Adelaide (2693 kilometres), in South Australia. This isolation impacts the ways in which musicians and industry members are able to develop and sustain their careers. Positively, this has resulted in a highly self-sufficient and entrepreneurial sector, where musicians have been able to develop and hone their creative practice in a relatively low-pressure environment which is geographically removed from the national music centres of Melbourne and Sydney. In turn, the sector is known for being highly collaborative, collegial and overall supportive of one another (Ballico, 2021). Negatively, the geographical isolation results in significant investments of time and money being required in order to engage in national and international music markets and associated audiences. This challenge is recognised as significantly influencing the ways in which careers develop (Ballico, 2013, 2021; Glitsos 2019; Trainer, 2016). The research reported has similarly found that these challenges remain. This is despite a range of proactive support measures being put in place over the past 20 years, such as a government arts funding, a strong suite of local music activities being staged by not-for-profit peak body West Australian Music (WAM), and national support from the Australia Council for the Arts (soon-to-be renamed Creative Australia) and Sounds Australia. Further opportunities to have these challenges mitigated – such as through financial and/ or mentoring support – is highly valued by the sector including by those who participated in this research.

Learning and professional development within the Western Australian contemporary music industry encompasses a range of formal, informal and non-formal opportunities. Formal, post-secondary courses are offered covering both contemporary and classical music performance, as well as aspects relating to music business and music technology. Courses are offered across a range of technical colleagues, public universities and private higher education institutions. Courses are offered across the near complete spectrum of the Australian Qualification Framework level, from Level 2 (Cert II) through Level 10 (Doctoral studies). This formal education can be further supplemented by national qualifications gained through the Australian Music Education Board (AMEB), who offer examinations for instruments used in classical and contemporary music performance and production, and – as is our focus here – industry-aligned conferences, workshops and mentoring programmes.

Methodology, methods and participant overview

The research reported here applied a mixed-methods approach which encompassed a qualitative-quantitative survey and qualitative semi-structured research interviews. This approach was applied due to its capacity to capture a breadth and depth of data from a wide range of participants, as evidenced by previous studies into the working lives of practitioners in the music and broader creative industries (Bartleet et al., 2020; Throsby & Petetskaya, 2017). The research engaged in ethical research practices through the application of an informed consent process per the funding agency’s protocols. Formal institutional ethics approvals were not sought owing to the project being undertaken by way of an independent consulting contract which was not administered through an institutional research office. Survey participants and interviewees were asked to agree with the study’s ethics statements prior to their participation. Survey participants were provided with the statement on the survey’s first page with their consent obtained before being able to move forward with answering the survey questions. Interviewees were provided with ethics materials in their email invitations to participate, with a verbal agreement sought at the commencement of each interview owing to their phone-based facilitation.

Musicians and industry practitioners were engaged across both data-collection methods, with fieldwork undertaken concurrently between November 2019 and February 2020. The survey was hosted on the SurveyMonkey website for a period of seven weeks, with interviews undertaken over a two-month period. The survey was promoted through the DLGSC email networks and targeted social media advertisements. Interviewees were directly approached by the chief investigator, with the interviews undertaken by two research assistants engaged on the project. Additional insights were provided by an industry practitioner who was approached but did not engage in a formal interview. The findings reported here draw on the formal interviews as well as the survey responses. Interview and survey participants have been de-identified, being assigned a number (i1–i5 for the interviews; r1–r188 for the survey respondents) with frequency of responses of individual survey questions shown with an f. The specific programmes and opportunities discussed have also been de-identified, being considered in relation to their format and delivery approach as outlined in greater detail in the section, Mentoring and professional development in music careers.

The survey was treated as the primary mode of data collection, with its questions used as a guide to inform the focus of the interview questions. In turn, the interviews allowed for the inclusion of a wider range of questions, with data from both data sets triangulated in order to compare, contrast and enrich the resulting analysis of the research findings. In considering the structure, function, focus and outcomes of existing mentoring opportunities, the survey questions concentrated on participants’ specific engagement in capacity-building, knowledge-development and mentoring programmes. This included participants’ reasons for engaging, the associated challenges, their most pressing professional development needs, the broad ways in which they learn new skills, their professional development plans for the next 2 years, and their preferred modes of engagement with mentoring programmes. Demographic information was also obtained, and, while predominantly encompassing multiple-choice questions, some short-form qualitative questions were asked.

When designing the survey, in order to understand the scale, scope, focus and approaches of existing models and programmes, an initial review of programmes on offer for WA’s contemporary music sector was undertaken. A total of 16 programmes were identified (13 Australian and 3 international) as being potential models for replication and/or engagement. Priority was given to those programmes specifically marketed as mentor–mentee based. This evaluation considered their scope and focus, target audience, time commitment/duration, financial assistance offered, additional resources/access provided and anticipated outcomes for attendees. In response to early trends showing in the data, minor adjustments were made at the end of the survey’s first week online. This included additional multiple-choice options for several questions relating to specific programmes and mentorship activities undertaken, as well as additional text boxes that captured short explanations of why participants provided the responses they did. The opportunity for participants to provide their concluding thoughts on options related to capacity-building, skills-development, learning and/or mentoring programmes was also provided. These adjustments were made as a result of participants listing additional opportunities not captured in the initial mentoring programme review, as well as an evident conflation of peer-learning opportunities with mentoring opportunities. The changes streamlined the survey completion and data-cleaning processes, allowing participants to add detail to their responses and the survey to capture a broader set of perspectives related to learning in the music industry.

Interviews were undertaken with five musicians and industry practitioners identified by the DLGSC as industry leaders and/or those who had engaged in a range of mentorship programmes and/or mentor–mentee relationships throughout their careers. Interviewees were asked questions relating to the ways in which they navigated their careers, the support they would have benefited from at various career junctures, their experiences of being a mentor and/or mentee, their ideal mentorship models, barriers and challenges in existing mentoring programmes, areas in need of support for the current day contemporary sector and barriers to opportunities within WA’s contemporary music sector. All five of the interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and thematically coded, with quotes identified for use in analysis and discussion. Thematic coding focused on career challenges, training opportunities, modes of learning and possible topics for inclusion in programmes, advice on funding allocations and the importance of such, barriers specific to the WA music sector and broader career development, as well as support available within WA, and reflections on mentoring experiences.

The survey garnered 188 responses from musicians and industry practitioners from across the state. The majority of participants (155) lived in the Perth metropolitan area, with 28 in a regional area and 5 in a remote area of the state. Gender identity was shared by 186 of these participants, with 123 identifying as male, 58 as female, 2 as non-binary and 1 each as gender fluid and transgender. A total of 17 participants identified as being lesbian, gay, bisexual, pansexual or asexual; 38 were born overseas; 14 lived with a disability or impairment; 5 mainly spoke a language other than English at home; and 2 were either Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander. While these demographics are not to be taken as representative of the wider Western Australian contemporary music sector, understanding the experiences of those who sit within minority and/ or marginalised groups is important to ensure that they can be appropriately catered to and supported when engaging in professional development opportunities. In addition, there has been an increased focus in recent years on catering specifically to minorities such as women and gender diverse people in the capacity building and professional development spaces as is discussed in greater detail in the findings of this research.

Of the 186 who provided their age, 55 were between the ages of 35 and 44 years, 46 were between 45 and 54 years, 40 were between 25 and 34 years and the remaining 41 were aged between 55 and 74 years. Participants had worked in the music industry for at least 1 year, and, on average, for 16 years; one had spent 57 years in the sector. Their self-defined career stage was nearly evenly split, with an equal number – f = 55 – identifying as being mid-career or established and 54 identifying as being early-career. Of note is that 23 shared that they were in the process of undergoing a career transition, demonstrating that capacity building and professional development opportunities can have an ongoing role in the ways in which musicians traverse their careers.

The most common role held was that of ‘musician’ with a total of 147 participants stating they held this and/or a similar role (such as composer, recording artist or songwriter). Taken collectively, teaching (private tuition, high school, university, TAFE and workshop facilitation) was the second most common role, reported at a frequency of 88. Artist manager (f = 51), artist/venue booking agent (f = 34) and studio producer/sound engineer (f = 33) were also commonly held roles. Reflective of existing research (Bartleet et al., 2019; Bartleet et al., 2020), the portfolio career configuration was similarly reflected in our research with the survey respondents holding an average of three roles each. Detailed demographic information was not obtained from the interviewees as they were chosen based primarily on the basis of their roles held within the industry, engagement with mentorship programmes and the desire to have gender parity in the sample (three were female and two were male). Interview participants held, on average, three roles in the sector from the following: artist manager, A&R consultant, musician, venue booker, festival promoter and showcase facilitator, mentor and philanthropist. All had experience as a mentor and/or mentee, with many engaging with the capacity-building, skills-development, learning and mentoring opportunities specific to this research.

Findings: Capacity building and mentorship experiences, barriers and possibilities in Western Australia

Capacity building and learning opportunities were highly valued by both the survey respondents and interviewees, with survey participants being slightly more positive than negative about their previous professional development and/ or mentorship experiences (rating them an average 3.42 out of 5). Participants engaged in such opportunities for a variety of reasons – ranging from broad career support to that which was specific to particular goals, activities and/ or skills development. There were, however, numerous barriers to engagement with such opportunities, ranging from a lack of awareness, to access and affordability as well as the need to diversify the options presently available.

The most common barrier to engaging with mentorship and related professional development opportunities was a lack of awareness (f = 101). While this could be attributed to the need for programmes to be better promoted within the sector, it is worthwhile considering this in relation to the fact that the vast majority of participants were engaged in a portfolio career; and therefore were likely limited in their ability to seek out or take on additional work elements, such as further training. More broadly, barriers to engaging with capacity-building and learning opportunities related to issues of accessibility and affordability. Survey participants stated that these include being unable to forgo wages (f = 82); being unable to commit to the time required to engage (f = 71); being unable to afford the programme costs (n = 70); or being unable to travel to attend (f = 36). Such financial and time-related hurdles were also reflected on by the interviewees who spoke of a lack of engagement by national mentoring programmes within the WA music market, as well as the costs associated with attending events within and outside of the state. A musician (who runs hip-hop workshops for children and teens), for example, explained that a lack of access to resources, such as recording equipment, has restricted the ways in which programmes have been able to run. This therefore highlights the need to re-examine the ways in which in programmes are offered and what is able to financially accounted for in funding applications. We make several suggestions of this in the Recommendations and research conclusions section below.

Barriers to entry were also experienced as a result of programmes being specific to people of a particular age and/or gender identity, a lack of relevance or suitability at an individual and/or sector level, as well as real and perceived genre inclusion/exclusion. Reflective of a recent shift in focus toward providing specific support to women, non-binary and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander musicians and industry practitioners, several survey participants who identified as male, expressed frustration at not being able to engage in learning opportunities. While illuminating a need to provide the sector with a more diverse range of options (including in relation to the modes of delivery), this finding must be considered in light of the survey’s male-dominated heteronormative sample group, where male-identifying individuals responded at nearly twice the rate of female-identifying and gender-diverse participants. Only two participants shared that they were Indigenous. It is important, therefore, to consider this in light of the interview data where the sample group achieved gender parity, and included one interviewee who was Indigenous, and another who worked extensively with Indigenous musicians as well as in regional areas of the state. Interviewees spoke of how such targeted opportunities, which cater to specific sectors of the community, are critically needed, and how the male dominance and preference within the industry limits women’s capacity to engage and build lasting careers. Accordingly, capacity-building, skills-development, learning and mentoring opportunities that support a cross sector of the community and facilitate a safe and inclusive sector are much needed and highly valued. Other barriers raised by survey participants related to the real and perceived barriers of age and genre inclusivity. For example, as one respondent (r = 9) who had engaged in a wide array of opportunities reflected:

I have done most of these, but if you don’t ‘fit the indie mould’ of genre, age, style etc. then you have to find somewhere else to fit or make them change it—one or the other.

Another (r = 1), in considering genre as a barrier alongside a range of other factors, reflected:

I do work regularly with peers to expand my skills. I do also always look at the music business emails I receive to see whether any of the skill-building opportunities could suit me, but they rarely do. They are often for people who don’t fit my demographic/genre, or they take place when I am teaching or gigging. I wish I could afford to take that time off to attend.

Barriers relating to age requirements for programmes are reflective of the age of survey participants, who were predominantly between the ages of 35 and 44 years. In some cases, participants reflected on perceptions around ageism in the industry more broadly. Overall, the importance of having programmes targeted toward teenagers, young adults and emerging musicians and practitioners was recognised, particularly by interviewees. What was found to be lacking, however, were opportunities to support specific sub-groups of workers, such as mid-career managers, and the associated experiences and opportunities being at this career stage. This demonstrates that professional development is not a one time or early career concern, and that it needs to be considered across the lifecycle of music and music industry careers in order to support longevity and ongoing creative and business development.

It was also noted that there is a need to “recognise other genres of music rather than just the traditional indie rock” (r = 97) and that “genre-specific favouritism” (r = 128) can result in a lack of representation and engagement by members of the sector. Programmes that support a diversity of genres was also recommended by one interviewee who extensively undertakes hip-hop workshops with children and teens. Further support for programmes such as this, the interviewee explained, would not only support the scene’s growth, but also provide much-needed creative and cultural benefits to vulnerable groups in the community. Reflecting on the experience of running a workshop with a group of refugee children (i = 5), one interviewee recalled:

[I] just talked about my culture and their culture and then they just sort of made tracks. I do a lot of the writing side of it more so than the beat-making side, so I mostly do lyrics and stuff, and we just sort of made a song about what their culture makes them feel and the pride they have from knowing where they come from but being happy here in Australia as well, so that was a great track we did.

This interviewee also explained that programming at high-profile music events could assist in raising the profile of under-represented scenes and associated genres. Taken collectively, these barriers to entry reveal that a wide range of needs must be addressed in order to support musician and industry practitioner engagement with mentoring opportunities. This could be addressed in a range of ways, from providing financial support to facilitate engagement with existing programmes, to advising on topics for inclusion, broadening the scope of what is offered and how programmes are delivered. The need for diversification was acknowledged by survey participants alike, with a lack of diversity being recognised as a notable barrier for inclusion.

Reflective of existing understandings of the structure and functioning of the WA contemporary music industry (cf Ballico, 2013; Ballico, 2015), networks (and the capacity to build one) are highly valued by the participants. To this end, the most pressing professional development need was advice on contacts, with the establishment of one’s network recognised as being the result of undertaking a range of other career development activities. This included having appropriate representation and contacts, or through undertaking other activities such as performing. Audience and market development, which upon an initial analysis were revealed to be the most pressing (and in turn that which was most lacking), were similarly recognised as being the result of a range of interrelated support mechanisms and career activities. This is demonstrative of the interconnected and multifaceted nature of music and associated industry careers. Considering this, gaps have also been revealed in relation to support being offered to particular subsets of workers, particular sub-genres of contemporary music and, particular skills and experiences also being overlooked.

Notably, mid-career managers and genre-specific musicians (such as hip-hop performers) are presently under-represented in the current suite of activities. This may be due to the barriers to entry associated with financial and time constraints, and a lack of prominent engagement with such a sub-genre in conference and festival events. It may also result from the perception that musicians who are of such a career stage do not need ongoing support owing to the fact they are likely to be established in their careers. Furthermore, particular topics and industry experiences relevant to this subgroup have also been found to be lacking in industry events. This ranges from ensuring that events are engaging speakers who can speak from a position similar to attendees, to specific topics (such as production, management, signing artists to record deals and large-scale DIY tour programming), and broadly to a scale of activity commensurate with being an established practitioner.

Overall, the findings reported here highlight the significant range in reasoning that creates barriers for engagement with mentorship opportunities. Access and affordability issues are shown to be of high concern in the data, with supporting challenges of programme relevance to individuals, sector level, genres and age brackets all contributing to an inability for industry workers to engage in learning opportunities to a level suitable for their career position.

Recommendations and research conclusions

The research reported here revealed that while participants had predominantly positive experiences of engaging in capacity building and professional development opportunities, and had engaged in a diverse set of opportunities, there were a range of possibilities for diversification and expansion of current offerings. This diversification includes the topics covered, the mentors engaged and the modes of delivery provided. A range of possibilities therefore exist in order to diversify the current offerings, their focus and the support offered:

1. The introduction of a ‘rapid response’/‘on-call’ mentoring programme: This would increase engagement with mentoring, lower barriers to entry for mentors and mentees alike and allow flexibility in support coverage. Engagement through appropriate video calling technology would also support a lowering of barrers.

2. The allocation of funds specific to engage with mentoring and professional development programmes: This would include both programme fees and lost wages and has the potential to support a wider remit of attendees who are otherwise unable to incur the fees and lost wages associated with attendance. This could also be further diversified to include support for particular sub-sectors of the music community such as Indigenous musicians, those whose work engages with particular genres (such as hip-hop) and mid-career level practitioners.

3. Financial (or other in kind support) for equipment to facilitate learning experiences in programmes: This has the capacity to diversify what is able to be taught as well as streamlining the facilitation in practice.

Addressing the barriers revealed in this research by adapting the recommendations listed here has the potential to support musicians and industry practitioners to develop dynamic and lasting careers. Such barriers uphold existing dominant structures and could see musicians leave the sector and by supporting a diversification of delivery modes and capacity for engagement, there is the potential to diversify attendance and support musicians and practitioners who otherwise would not have access to continued learning opportunities – particularly when considered in light of the investments of time and money (either through costs incurred or wages lost) required for engagement. A flexibility in approaches is also low cost and can diversify the engagement of facilitators into such programmes and opportunities.