It’s just over 20 years since I joined Cockpit Studios and began developing what became a widely recognised incubation model for makers under the leadership of Vanessa Swann and Sydney Levinson. And it’s now more than 25 years since I started supporting creatives to build sustainable, thriving practices.
A lot has changed in that time. But some things haven’t changed nearly enough.
So I’ve been asking myself: if I were designing a programme today, from scratch, what would I include?
Here’s what I know would matter (in no particular order!):
Image / Roos Koole / Moment / Getty Images
1. Pay for local expertise
Mentoring often features in development programmes and for good reason. But it should never be extractive (i.e. unpaid) or completely outsourced to other places. It’s another opportunity to strengthen the local ecosystem.
I’d build in paid industry mentoring from people rooted in the local creative scene. Not just because it’s fair, but because it keeps programme funding circulating where it’s most needed and recognises the amazing talent that’a already in a place.
2. Funding & finance that actually works for creatives
Generating enough profit to invest in new ideas and precarious cashflow have always been the dual crisis in creative work.
So, I’d prioritise
Micro-grants for immediate needs, cost of living and R&D, with super simple application forms and outcomes set by the creatives
Interest-free / low-interest, patient mirco-loans, for ideas that do have the potential to generate additional revenue in time, designed to recycle into an evergreen fund, much like what we piloted with the Cockpit Arts loan fund
And one thing I’d remove entirely?
Those match funded capital grants. Especially those that expect upfront payment in full. They tend to exclude the very people these programmes claim to support.
Where the cash comes from is another matter. It’s not my area of expertise, but have a hunch that local philanthropy is an untapped opportunity here.
Gill Wildman has been doing great work in this space with Hopeful Finance.
3. Commission programme participants to deliver content and training
Too many programmes rely on unpaid or underpaid contributions from creatives, framing them as ‘exposure oppotunities’. Or bring in ‘experts’ to deliver all of the training, ignoring the brilliance and lived experience of the programme participants themselves.
So I would:
Offer training in facilitation and workshop design
Commission creatives to design and deliver, or co-deliver training
We flipped to this model at the Real Creative Futures Digital programme, which became video commissions during COVID, mainly to find a way to distribute some of the programme budget directly to creatives. We saw how powerful this could be, not just building skills, but confidence, authority, and new income streams. But to test new workshop or content creation ideas in a safe and supportive environment. A lot of the commssioned video content is still online and worth a look.
4. Get people into different spaces
Access shapes opportunity. And programmes are often led by a host organisation(s), who house the majority of programme events. While I get this from a budget and logistics perspective, it’s a missed opportunity to help creatives access spaces they might not ordinarily feel welcome in. This approach is inspired directly by You Make It who follow this model.
I’d include intentionally hosted events in a range of venues, not just the usual spaces, with budget allocated specifically to enable this. This would include time in outdoor, green and wild spaces, which is proven to boost wellbeing and creativity.
Different environments create different conversations, connections, and possibilities.
5. Business coaching as standard
OK I might be a bit biased here as a coach. When I introduced business coaching at Cockpit Studios, it was rare. Now, thankfully, it’s far more common. There are so many modalities out there, brilliant creatives with a coaching practice and Coaching For Creatives who I would def check out if you’re looking for coaches for your programme.
I’d make it core, not optional, because the impact is transformative when it’s done well. And if there was enough demand, offer coaching training to creatives to help build the local coach pool.
6. Facilitated spaces and sharing circles (without an agenda)
Not everything needs content. Creatives don’t just need information. They need space to think, reflect, explore and make decisions. And while individual coaching is great for this, so can be small facilitated groups.
I’d build in facilitated peer circles with no fixed agenda. Safe spaces focused on:
Creative and idea development
Exploration and reflection
Relationship-building
I find this works best when the same group of people can meet periodically over say 6 or 12 months, to build trust. Filomena Rodriguez (a creative coach who I greatly admire) talk about the need for these spaces a lot. We pitch them, but it’s hard to make the case for open ended gatherings. These spaces are often where the deepest shifts happen.
7. Financial literacy support that resonates
While a lot has shifted over the last 30 years, the need for improved clarity, confidence and competence when it comes to money hasn’t changed much.
Personally, I think it’s a myth that creatives are not ‘good at money’. It can be true that people are not motivated by money, or lack confidence when it comes to maths though.
Which is exactly why Gill Thewlis and I created Making Money Meaningful. Shameless plug - our first course is now live for enrolment. It’s a full financial and business modelling approach designed specifically for creatives and covers everything from money mindset and working with accountants, to costing, pricing, cashflow, financial planning and more.
Any programme I designed would include practical, values-aligned financial literacy, not abstract theory, but tools creatives can actually use in their day-to-day lives.
8. Legal support with a collective focus
Legal advice and practical support to help creatives form co-operatives, mutual aid structures, and collectives feels increasingly important. Not just as community models, but as ways to help creatives create, share, license, and exploit intellectual property together, while retaining more ownership and value collectively.
Too often, creatives work in isolation and negotiate from a position of weakness. But together they can pool resources, share risk, build bargaining power, and create fairer ways of generating income from their work.
Again not my area of specialism, but I’ve been watching the Artist Corporations movement in the US and think this might be the next frontier for creative business development.
Final Thought
One of my biggest bugbears whenever I see creative industry funding / programme announcements is the relentless focus on “high growth”. I’d rather see programmes reframed to support (and measure) creatives to grow in ways that actually mean something to them: more stability, better balance, deeper practice, stronger communities, sustainable income, ownership of their work, or simply the ability to keep making excellent work over time. I wrote about how to grow without getting bigger here.
Micro-businesses are the lifeblood of the creative sector. And small can be good. Often, growth looks like staying independent, paying yourself properly, having time to think, or building a practice that lasts.
That matters the most.
What have I missed? Add your thoughts :)