In this section we will outline the many considerations that may help you assess the compatibility of a Co-Production Partner for a particular project.  We have organized these into the broad categories of Artistic, Organizational, and Production, but there are of course a lot of overlaps.

It is important to consider all three of these areas of compatibility.  If the artistic goals align, but the organizations don’t match up in terms of scale or structure it may be very difficult to arrive at a budget that all parties can accept.  If organizations match up, but the artistic teams can’t agree it can lead to conflicts and attempts to re-work the production for each run which can erase the savings that most Co-Productions are aiming to achieve.  

It may help to start by exploring these same factors for your own organization.  Recognize that each project (or season) may present unique opportunities and challenges that are leading you to seek out a partnership.  Confirm that the key members of your team understand what motivates this coproduction, what is absolutely necessary to achieve, and what might be the more aspirational goals.  Armed with this understanding you can better seek out partners and vet them as well as build a budget and co-production agreement that reflects these needs and hopes for a partnership.  

You may also find that better articulating these considerations for a given project may be helpful in crafting broader communication to your full staff, your board, or even to help your patrons understand why you choose to co-produce. 

Artistic Compatibility Metrics

• Mission and Values Compatibility / Artistic Directors’ Visions - Will the two artistic directors align in their stewardship of the production?  Do they share similar artistic approaches/interests and/or are they each interested in collaborating? Alternatively, is the artistic director of the Receiving Theater keen to receive  production from another theater without having the latitude to fully shape the production? 

• Artist Overlap - (e.g., playwrights, directors, designers) - While it can certainly be a benefit of Co-Productions to be introduced to new artists, it can also be a challenge if one theater engages a creative team that is entirely new to working in your theater.  It can therefore be wise to look for at least one or more artists who have already worked at each of the theaters. 

• Production Values - Do the two theaters create similar physical productions? Is one accustomed to a higher level of finishes or quality of construction to the production elements? Does one have a minimalist style?  Understanding and acknowledging these differences and if necessary, agreeing to an approach for the Co-Production, can avoid surprises. (see below in organizational metrics for examples). 

• Production Goals - While the goals of doing a Co-Production might not always be the same, it is important for each of the theaters to articulate their goals and ensure each  theater's goals can be met in the partnership.

• Extended Play Development - If one theater is looking to give a new play additional room (time/space/money) for development and the other needs to receive a ready-to-go play with limited work for their staff it might not be the best match. It is important to be clear and honest about changes from one run to the next (with staff and artists) if the goal of the transfer is to give the show a chance to further develop. How much are the theaters willing to invest in that further development at stop two? Even if saving money is the primary goal of the Co-Production, the creative team will almost always want to tweak or further fine-tune the production of a new play when they tech it again.  This might mean the two theaters need to include some funds in the shared budget to allow for changes or it might just require that the second theater’s PM to  prepare their team for this possibility to avoid surprises. This may also affect the designer residencies for the Receiving Theater. 

• Afford Larger Shows - Bigger casts/bigger physical productions is perhaps the most common inspiration and the easiest to find common ground on. 

• More Work/Income for Artists - This can be challenging for ensemble/resident company theaters who are looking to give work to their company members specifically, unless the other theater is keen to bring those artists to their community. 

• More Exposure for Your Theater - If the Originating Theater has a strong brand of work and the Receiving Theater is interested in bringing that brand to its audience 

• Cross Pollination - If the theaters have resident companies or use mostly local artists and agree to a split it can mean a melding of artists who might not otherwise collaborate. 

Organizational Compatibility Metrics

• Budget Size - Can be a basic litmus test of compatibility and can often indicate that the two companies might have similar resources, but production budgets don’t always align by overall budget size.

• Budget Compatibility - Is less apparent on the surface, but no less important in determining how to structure an agreement.

• Staffing - A common example of this is how each theater budgets for staffing.  If the Originating Theater has very little permanent production staff and either overhires or otherwise outsources their physical production needs they will likely have quite large production budgets to reflect this reality.  If the Receiving Theater carries a large permanent production staff their production budgets likely don’t reflect the full labor cost of mounting a production.  A shared budget for these two companies might be hard to reconcile as the Receiving Theater will likely be unprepared to cover this labor disparity and some kind of compromise must be negotiated.  The inverse - an Originating Theater that has a large staff - might wish to ensure that they aren't delivering the physical production at a substantial ‘discount’ to a company that is accustomed to paying far more for their physical production. 

• Local vs. Out-of-Town Artists - Inherent to a Co-Production is that one or more of the companies will be hosting a significant number of out-of-town artists.  If all of the companies are not accustomed to having a lot of out-of-town artists it may make the finances harder.  This is an important factor to assess early and where possible bake into the “mission” of the Co-Production, i.e., “we aim to split artists evenly between our two cities” or “our goal is to bring the Originating Theater’s ensemble to our city”.  Even if both companies typically use a similar ratio of out-of-town artists they might have very different economic models (local cost, owning, leased, short term rental) for their artist housing which can be equally challenging to match-up in the budgeting process.

• Fiscal Health/Risk Tolerance - Also requires a deeper understanding of a potential partner but will be important to understand when building the structure of an agreement or budget and especially in navigating the partnership.  

  • Cash Flow - If, for instance, the Originating Theater will be mounting a production that is much larger than their normal productions which could cause cash flow challenges on their end.  If the Receiving Theater has their own cash flow challenges, they might be unable to make a substantial down payment on shared expenses to help the Originating Theater get the initial production mounted. 

  • Contingency - It is important to establish clearly how the partnership will manage unbudgeted expenses.  This can be an area where theaters might handle things quite differently.  One theater may budget very tightly and make decisions about budget overages in real time based on how their income and expenses are playing out.  Another theater might build in substantial contingencies into their budgeting to ensure they don’t go over budget.  Understanding this early and building expectations into the agreement and budget can avoid pitfalls later. 

• Contracts - Operating on the same union contracts (and even contract tiers) can smooth the process substantially.  Alternatively the playing order of a Co-Production might be fiscally driven by the need to move from the smaller theater to the larger as fees and salaries can go up in a transfer, but usually cannot go down. 

• Organizational Chart Comparison - Institutions are all structured a little differently and even when job titles might match up there can be a disparity in what duties lie with which person.  It is very helpful early on to test these assumptions by establishing who at each theater will handle the major facets of the Co-Production and it also rarely hurts to include more of each team in meetings and emails, especially early on.   

Production Compatibility Metrics

• Scope and Scale - Do all of the companies produce at roughly the same scale?  A large disparity in these expectations can provide a budget challenge but also can be a concern in terms of each theater’s staff being able to produce at that scale.  This can be a challenge in both directions where one theater might lack the capability to go big or use expensive technology while another theater’s team might struggle to work cheaply if accustomed to having more resources and delivering with higher production values or more expensive materials. 

• Stage Dimensions/Physical and Equipment Compatibility - Sharing similar stage forms (proscenium, thrust, etc.) and dimensions of course helps minimize changes required between venues. When surveying a partnership, it is important to analyze the differences in stage dimensions (big or small) and plan for how you’ll ask the creative teams to work to find a common scheme.

  • Create an Overlapping Groundplan - Devise a ground plan and section that overlays the Receiving Theaters stage on top of the Originating Theater so the creative team and production teams can determine how to make the set work in all of the spaces.  Make one early and insist that the creative teams use it or propose another solution.

  • Designing Within the Lines - It may be wise to collaborate on setting a shared boundary line that works on all of the stages - effectively a “3D box” the design must fit in to avoid substantial modifications and/or restaging between venues.

  • Asymmetrical Spaces - This will require production managers to agree on the best possible overlap which might not result in matching plaster lines or even center lines depending on how symmetrical the spaces are or how dissimilar the stage forms are from each other. 

    • Automation, Lighting, Sound, and Projections - Don’t neglect to think about these areas when determining your overlap and assessing the designs.  

• Equipment Inventories - Having similarly equipped theaters can also help financially and logistically.  If one theater has loads of moving lights and the other only has conventionals it can add substantial cost or force artists to make more changes between venues which can in turn add tech time. 

• Production Values - Related to scope and scale above, but not always a purely budget driven aspect is what level of finish each theater’s shop is accustomed to delivering.

  • Do they tend to build hard show specific masking or do they depend on stock stage curtains?

  • Are they meticulously period-specific down to every minute detail, or are designs more minimal and/or theatrical? 

  • Do they build a lot of show-specific costumes or largely shop and alter to fit?

  • Are designers expected to depend heavily on the theater’s inventory of equipment, props, costumes, etc.,  or is there an expectation (and a budget) for robust rental/purchase/build budgets?

• Bandwidth/Capacity (staffing) - Also adjacent to scope and scale, but more specifically speaking to the capabilities of each team and their available capacity to work on the project at the time of production.  Sometimes for a Receiving Theater these considerations are a factor in seeking to do a Co-Production - essentially delivering something their team either can’t create or isn’t available to create at that time.  It is also important for the Receiving Theater to communicate what scale of production they are prepared to receive.

• Unions/Crew Limitations - There can be many implications to consider if only one of the theaters uses union labor in their shops and/or theaters.  It is wise to determine early if this disparity exists and what the impacts may be on the Co-Production.

  • Budget -  It can sometimes create a bigger gap to navigate as hourly rates and the implications of work rules may skew costs as compared to the non-union theater(s).

  • Run Crew - There may also be very specific limits on crew size or the tasks each crew member is allowed to perform.  The Production Managers should clearly establish what size run crew each is prepared to make sure the Originating Theater mounts the production with this limit in mind. 

• Co-Producing/Transfer Experience, and Expertise -  If one or more of the teams have limited or no experience transferring shows it will take a great deal of training and oversight to ensure success.