No Man is an Island: Immersive Artists Join Forces for Audience Research

“No man is an island,” wrote English poet John Donne in 1624. Yet within today’s cultural landscape, creators of immersive productions often still feel like pioneers each reinventing the wheel on their own little island. Time for more collaboration and knowledge exchange, thought immersive artists Puck van Dijk, Danny van Zuijlen, and Thomas Brand. They decided to join forces and collectively embark on a process of audience research, supported by audience data expert Kim van den Brink from Ask Your Audience and Curious Culture, and funded by Platform ACCT.

“It’s great that new opportunities for collaboration are arising within the sector,” says Danny van Zuijlen of Studio Immersief. “It’s interesting to see how competitors can grow into collaborators. That creates economies of scale, builds trust, and offers the chance to reflect on each other’s work, which helps you move forward.”

The audience research for Studio Immersief was conducted during the test phase of their immersive murder mystery production Sleepy Hollow. “The research had two components: surveys and interviews. We incorporated the feedback directly into the next playtest. That was incredibly valuable.”

Multidisciplinary maker Thomas Brand also immediately saw the added value of this approach and had audience research conducted on his installation Mergel. “Normally, when you talk to your audience yourself, they’ll say everything was amazing, because they know or follow you. But this time, people were interviewed by Kim, which resulted in more objective and deeper insights. I received a lot of qualitative data – many quotes that I’m already using to develop the next phase of the work. This process was so fruitful that I’m including a similar trajectory in my next funding proposal. The term ‘immersive’ is also extremely broad. We’re three very different makers within this field, and it’s fascinating to ask: is there any overlap in our audiences? That was one of the main reasons I wanted to join.”

“Audience research should be automatically included in your planning and budget – but it isn’t.”

Immersive theatre maker Puck van Dijk created the immersive audio walk Reuzen van Noord two years ago, about and for residents of Amsterdam North. The retrospective audience research focused on the lasting impact of this production. Van Dijk believes it should be standard practice for makers to hear what effect their work has had: “This really became clear to me through the research. For us, it’s a no-brainer to want to know the impact of what we’ve created, but it’s not automatically included in your planning, your setup, or your budget. And it really should be, especially since funders, governments, and sponsors often ask about the impact of your production.”

“I spoke to another maker who was selected for an international film festival and told them about our research,” she continues. “She said a programmer at the festival had asked if they’d conducted audience research. She just laughed and replied: ‘With what money?’ The way we did it really was a triple win.”

All three makers worked with Ask Your Audience to study their audiences individually, after a joint kickoff and concluding with a shared reflection session. “What was great is that we discussed our definitions of ‘audience’ during that final session,” says Thomas Brand. “Clarifying that together opens up new ways of thinking about your own artistic practice. That’s a huge benefit of doing this collectively.”

“Among us immersive makers, we don’t really use the word ‘audience’,” adds Danny van Zuijlen. “We talk about visitors, participants, or experiencers. An ‘Audience’ watches from a distance, while a participant is immersed in the work.”

The process gave the makers more than just individual data. “In traditional theatre, audience research, peer contact, and collaboration are more common,” says Thomas Brand. “But in the immersive world, you’re often a lone wolf, doing your own thing. There’s little cross-pollination. Having three very different makers at the table to talk about a shared theme is incredibly valuable and actually a lot of fun. We’re not competitors. We’re all just trying to invent a new wheel together.”

“We don’t really use the term audience. An audience watches from a distance, a participant is immersed in the work”

Danny van Zuijlen emphasizes the importance of audience research in attracting new audiences: “I see us immersive makers as part of the experience economy. What can we learn from theme parks, festivals, escape rooms? The people who go there are a potentially interesting target audience for us, but they haven’t been studied much by the cultural sector. Why is the threshold for traditional theatre so high? Because there are barriers that make new audiences feel out of place, even beyond the content of the show. That’s something I’m eager to explore. I love how a festival like Tomorrowland or a park like Disneyland has elements we can implement to make visitors feel immediately at home with us.”

Puck van Dijk sees a practical benefit in mapping each other’s audiences: “I was curious about potential overlap, a kind of Venn diagram. I’d like to be able to refer back to that when thinking about how we can support each other’s audience groups. If you’re aware of each other’s timeline and target group, you can also refer people to one another’s work.”

Danny van Zuijlen: “We’re grateful we could participate in this process through DigiPACCT, which contributes to a future-proof labor market in the cultural and creative sector. By collecting, sharing, and exchanging knowledge, we’ve all grown as makers.”

Read more about the methodology and results of the research on the Studio Immersief website.