Available via license: CC BY-NC-ND 3.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
113
Sand, Stine Agnete (2017). How to Succeed with Film Production in the Regions? A Study of
Key Success Factors in the Norwegian Regional Film Business. Nordicom Review 38(1): 113-125.
doi:10.1515/nor-2016-0035
How to Succeed with Film Production
in the Regions?
A Study of Key Success Factors
in the Norwegian Regional Film Business
Stine Agnete Sand
Abstract
This article explores what two regional lm production companies in Norway do to sur-
vive and succeed with their goals. The production of feature lms in Norway is largely an
Oslo-based effort, but despite this reality, there are companies in the regions that produce
feature lms. The analysis draws on semi-structured interviews with eight employees in two
companies. Mer Film has in relatively short time managed to attract talented directors and
establish networks with international, critically acclaimed production companies. Filmbin
was one of the rst lm companies in Norway who committed themselves to the produc-
tion of lms for children. The article shows that success must be related to context and that
reputation, talent development and choice of genre, geographical location, networking and
social capital, risk diversication, entrepreneurship, organizational culture and leadership,
are essential factors for the companies.
Keywords: regional lm, success, lm companies, knowledge-based resources
Introduction
According to a report on the economy and nancial ows in the Norwegian lm business
(Ryssevik et al. 2014), Norwegian lm production is centralized and characterized by
small companies, low protability and movies that often end up running decits. Low
production volume represents ongoing challenges for the lm business, and particularly
for regional lmmakers. The production of feature lms, after all, is largely an Oslo-
based effort, and in 2015, 80 per cent of the funding from the Norwegian Film Institute
(NFI) went to the capital area (NFI 2015). The article discusses how two regional com-
panies survive in a difcult business.
This is a highly relevant issue because lmmaking is important to the Norwegian
authorities, who have described lm as one of the most important cultural expressions
of the era (St.meld. 30 (2014-2015)). It is a stated goal that Norwegian lms should
succeed both in Norway and internationally, and that the lms should be of good qual-
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 11/28/17 2:53 PM
114
Stine Agnete Sand
ity. The national lm policy also states that the lm companies need to be more eco-
nomically viable. Film production should be less dependent upon public funding, and
also contribute to economic growth. The importance of culture as a source of national
economic growth is a talking point of both politicians and people within the cultural
sector (Bille 2013: 165). The government’s second objective is to strengthen regional
lm production, in the interests of providing a real counterweight to the dominance of
the capital (St.meld. 30 (2014-2015): 12).
Little research has looked at the actual relationships between small companies, their
strategies and performance (Gibcus & Kemp 2003: 41). In this context, I discuss what
two well-established regional companies do to survive and succeed with their goals.
I explore key success factors, with a focus on knowledge-based resources, and how
the use of this competence can be advantageous (Barney 1991, Wernerfelt 1984). The
article is based on interviews with eight employees in the two regional lm production
companies Mer Film, which has an ofce in Bergen, Western Norway and in Tromsø,
Northern Norway, and Filmbin, which has an ofce in Lillehammer, Eastern Norway.
What does it mean to be successful?
Screenwriter William Goldman’s remark “Nobody knows anything” is often quoted as
an illustration of the uncertainty in the lm business – it is difcult to predict a suc-
cess, and the rate of nancial failures is high (Simonton 2009). According to Simonton,
there are three main criteria by which a lm’s success can be evaluated: critical evalua-
tions, nancial performance, and movie awards. These criteria represent both aesthetic
and economic assessments. Several studies focus on commercial success, including
blockbusters and how to predict nancial success (Collins et al. 2002, Litman & Kohl
1989). Research on critical evaluations and movie awards often relate this to nancial
performance as well (Ginsburgh 2003).
This article has a different starting point. Discussing the regional lm business in a
small country like Norway, the concept of success must be related to its context. Prot-
ability in the private lm and television business in Norway is poor (Ryssevik et al.
2014). The government’s increased focus on sustainability and economic viability is
related to this. The Norwegian lm business is fragmented, comprised mostly of small
companies with low earnings. This applies to Scandinavia as a whole as well – there
are few large, robust rms, and many companies produce less than a lm per year on
average (Bondebjerg & Redvall 2011: 9).
Secondly, as in many other countries in Europe, the government in Norway provides
substantial subsidies to lmmakers in order to maintain a domestic industry. This means
that the lms do not have to be as protable for the industry to survive. The companies
in Norway do not solely depend on private money when nancing a lm and this makes
their situation quite different from, for instance, the industry in Los Angeles.
Thirdly, much of the economic research that deals with companies assumes that the
aim is to achieve economic growth and protability. What distinguishes Norwegian re-
gional lm companies in this regard is that prot is not necessarily the main goal. Any
company depends upon a certain amount of income, but one characteristic of people
working with lm (and others in creative professions) is that their creative goals, and
the inner motivation they possess to achieve them, can be more important than high
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 11/28/17 2:53 PM
115
How to Succeed with Film Production in the Regions?
salaries or returns (Deuze 2011, Hesmondhalgh & Baker 2011). Caves (2003: 74) calls
this position “art for art’s sake”. However, as several researchers have pointed out, there
is also a danger of self-exploitation (Banks 2007, Stahl 2009). For instance, many lm
workers accept low wages or working for free just to be able to work with lm.
In this article, the concept of success is therefore based upon an understanding of
1), survival, since surviving as a company for more than ve years is an achievement
under the existing circumstances, and 2), art for art’s sake, which means relating success
to the companies’ own goals. They are driven by artistic ambitions, not protability.
This commitment is possible due to public funding and various support schemes for the
production of artistic lms. In addition, to discuss success must also be related to the
companies’ commitment to their region, and their emphasis on promoting the local lm
business and to use the region as a starting point for their work.
A resource-based perspective on companies
The role of human capital and knowledge-based resources are gaining increased atten-
tion when discussing creative industries (Boccardelli et al. 2008). Edith Penrose (1959)
describes companies’ growth as a process and explores the links between company re-
sources, management’s control of these resources, and company opportunities for value
creation. Strategically relevant resources for a company are, according to Barney, “those
attributes of a rm’s physical, human, and organizational capital that do enable a rm
to conceive of and implement strategies that improve its efciency and effectiveness”
(1991: 102). Such a resource must be (1) valuable, to the extent that the resource utilises
opportunities and reduces threats in the corporate environment. The broader environment
of the company creates the opportunities and threats that a business strategy has to deal
with (Fombrun & Graham Astley 1983). (2) rare with regard to the company’s current
and potential competitors, (3) non-inimitable, and (4) non-substitutable with another
resource. In addition, Barney emphasises that in order to be successful, the company
needs to utilise their resources in a way that benets the company.
Knowledge-based resources refer to “a rm’s intangible know-how and skills, which
cannot be imitated because they are protected by knowledge barriers” (Chan-Olmsted
2008: 166). These resources, or human skills, are important in a business context that is
characterized by change and uncertainty (Miller & Shamsie 1996: 523). Many organi-
sational decisions are the product of a dynamic relationship between the company, its
environment, and its attempt to develop and implement activities that adapt its resources
to the changing environment (Chan-Olmsted 2008: 161).
Although resource-based theory is dominant in strategy research, challenges remain
as to how resources should be identied, categorised and analysed (Chan-Olmsted 2008,
Foss 1998: 135). This article investigates success factors and resources based on the
premises that the companies are committed to pursue artistic goals, and try to survive in
a difcult business. To identify and analyse success factors, I focus on three categories:
human capital, or company specic competence within the company. These include
experience, reputation and the ability to attract talented people. The second dimension
is social, or relational capital, which includes social network and ties external to the
company, for instance the capability to activate relations with lm workers in the com-
munity. Thirdly, geographical location is an important factor because the companies
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 11/28/17 2:53 PM
116
Stine Agnete Sand
are committed to the local lm business and because the location gives the companies
some place specic advantages.
Methodological approach
The article is based on semi-structured interviews with employees in two regional produc-
tion companies, which produce ction lms. Mer Film AS has an ofce in Bergen and in
Tromsø, and consists of three companies: Mer Film AS in Tromsø, Mer Film i Vest AS in
Bergen, and Mer Filmdistribusjon AS. Owner and producer Maria Ekerhovd founded the
company in 2011. She had previously produced the short lm Sniffer, which was the rst
Norwegian lm to win the Palme d’Or in Cannes (in 2006). She has also produced I am
yours, Norway’s Oscar candidate in 2014, and Out of nature, which won the award for
best European lm at the Berlin Film Festival in 2015. In 2016, the company had seven
employees.1 Producer Ragna Midgard takes care of projects in the Tromsø region, while
Ekerhovd develops projects in the Bergen region. Øistein Refseth is responsible for the
distribution company Mer Filmdistribusjon, and Siv Dyb Wangsmo works with nance
and administration. Axel Helgeland is an executive producer, advising and mentoring
Ekerhovd. Helgeland has produced a number of feature lms. Mer Film is an interesting
case because of their results. In just ve years, the company has succeeded with produc-
ing six feature lms, three short lms, and ve co-productions with acclaimed directors
such as Wim Wenders and Amat Escalante. Their lms have received good reviews, and
have been screened at prestigious lm festivals such as Toronto and Berlin.
The second company is Filmbin, which is based in Lillehammer, central eastern part
of Norway. Filmbin is interesting because it was the rst production company in the
Lillehammer area, a small lm region compared to Oslo. Still, the company has survived
for 12 years. Producer Trine Aadalen Lo, her husband, director Christian Lo, and lm
editor and scriptwriter Arild Tryggestad established Filmbin in Lillehammer in 2004. In
2009, they hired Nicholas Sando as a producer, and the four now co-own the company.
Filmbin produces lms for children and youth, and its rst feature lm, Raki, came out
in 2009. It received the Norwegian cinema managers’ highest award, for best children’s
lm in 2009, and it was screened at the Berlin Film Festival the following year. The fea-
ture lm The tough guys came out in 2013. It won the Audience Award at the Children’s
Film Festival in Kristiansand, Norway, and was screened at the Chicago International
Children’s Film Festival. In addition, the company has produced several short lms.
Filmbin also makes practical and organisational arrangements for other companies that
do productions in the Lillehammer area, and it presents lm courses and helps with the
hiring of professionals. The company is now developing its third lm.
The companies present interesting cases with regard to artistic versus commercial suc-
cess. Both Mer Film and Filmbin have won awards for their lms, but neither company
has been particularly commercially viable. Nor is that their main objective – the desire
to make quality lms is greater than the desire to make lots of money. As Hesmondhalgh
and Baker (2011) note, the notion of ‘good work’ is a mineeld, but both companies have
a common perception of success in the sense that they value creativity and autonomy,
and that the creative ambitions are more important than the search for prot.
I conducted semi-structured interviews at the ofces of Mer Film in Bergen and
Filmbin in Lillehammer during June and August 2014. The interviews were structured
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 11/28/17 2:53 PM
117
How to Succeed with Film Production in the Regions?
around themes, and the durations were one to two hours each. In the analysing process,
I read the interviews separately, and categorized the ndings in each interview. Next, I
compared the ndings within each company before I compared the two companies. In
the interpretation process, the starting point for the analysis was the research question:
How do the companies, whose goals are creative and artistically motivated, go about
to survive and succeed with their goals? The analyzing process does not exist within a
vacuum: it is necessary to relate the research question to the situation in the Norwegian
lm business. This context has implications for the discussion of success factors.
Film companies rely on their good reputations when it comes to recruiting people
and to securing project nancing. Several researchers, as a result, have observed that it
is difcult to acquire ‘true’ information (Caldwell 2008, Lotz 2009). The interviewees
are professionals, or what Bruun calls ‘exclusive’ informants (2014). It is important
to remember that these companies have different goals, management expectations and
tolerance for risk, meaning that they might react differently to the same set of conditions.
The researcher must therefore be careful not to generalise about the industry based on
the situations of only a few companies (Picard 2002: 11).
The article is primarily based on interviews, but media articles about the companies
are included in this study’s empirical material as an additional source.
An analysis of key success factors
Some researchers argue that small companies work hard to survive from day to day
and therefore do not have time for strategic planning (Hanlon & Scott 1993). The two
companies discussed here do not fall into this category, since both have invested effort
into their long-term planning. In this section, I discuss factors that contribute to the
companies’ success.
Reputation, talent development and choice of genre
Work in the lm industry is organized around projects and informal personal networks,
and is often referred to as a network organization (Hirsch 1972, Jones 1996). Several
studies show that reputation, successful performances, track record, and strength of
ties are important to succeed (DeFillippi & Arthur 1998, Jones & DeFillippi 1996).
Ekerhovd gained recognition when she produced the Palme d’Or winner Sniffer (di-
rected by Bobbie Peers), Best Short Film in Cannes 2006. Her reputation as a skilled
producer appears to be an important reason for Mer Film’s success and resulted in the
co-production of the lm Everything will be ne (2015), directed by the internationally
acclaimed German director Wim Wenders. Ekerhovd had collaborated with scriptwriter
Bjorn Olaf Johannessen on the movie Dirk Ohm, and they simply extended their work
together when Wenders’s production company, Neue Road Movies, developed Johan-
nessen’s new script.
The mission of Mer Film is “to develop and produce Norwegian and international
art-house lms by directors with a personal artistic vision”.2 The company wants to reach
audiences both in Norway and internationally, producing one lm per year, preferably
made in Western and Northern Norway. Ekerhovd has achieved industry recognition for
her commitment to art house lms, which gives the company a competitive advantage
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 11/28/17 2:53 PM
118
Stine Agnete Sand
in an industry where people privilege one’s track record. This is something the company
exploits in terms of securing further funding and also recruiting new talent. For example,
Ekerhovd produced Bobbie Peers’ short lm Sniffer, and later she produced his rst fea-
ture lm, Dirk Ohm: The disappearing illusionist (2015). The collaborations often start
with the production of a short lm, to see if director and company work well together.
Like Mer Film, Filmbin focuses on artistic ambitious projects, and they want to
make ‘lms with meaning’. Producer Trine Aadalen Lo argues that to make an impact
on children and youth is one way of dening success:
After producing the film The tough guys, we received letters from schools and
kids, who thanked us for making a film that puts bullying on the agenda. That
made me feel that we had succeeded.
For Filmbin, the choice of genre distinguished it from most other companies when it
established itself in Lillehammer in 2004. At that time, few other companies in Norway
specialised in lms for children and young people. Films for children were a priority in
the governmental lm policy statement known as “Veiviseren” [Pathnder] which came
in 2007, but few such lms followed its release. NFI director Nina Refseth stated in 2012
to the lm magazine Rushprint that the institute typically received few applications for
the production of lms for children.3 Thus Filmbin’s timing was good; in addition, the
company’s rst lm received favorable reviews in the media and at festivals, which was
important to establishing Filmbin’s reputation. Barney (1991) calls this a “rst-move
advantage”. Filmbin received so-called package-funded development from NFI two
years after its rst lm premiered, which meant that it received support to develop three
feature lms. Still, competition in this area has increased since their initial capitalization,
and Filmbin no longer stands out as it did before.
The companies’ choices of genre can be seen as a strategy aimed at nancial sustain-
ability – Mer Film produces art house lms, while Filmbin makes lms for children
and youth, and both specialties have good support structures. NFI has funds for the
development and production of artistic lms and a lm with unique artistic potential
can receive grants for up to 85 per cent of its development, production and promotion
costs. Children’s movies can receive up to NOK nine million in ‘etterhåndsstøtte’ [ex
post support], while other lms can receive a maximum of seven million. All Norwegian
feature lms that sell more than 35.000 tickets at the cinema are eligible for ex post sup-
port. This type of support is designed to compensate for the fact that Norway is a small
market, and that Norwegian lms have a limited chance of success on the international
market. Support is equal to 100 per cent of the producer’s net income, or 200 per cent
for lms for children.4 Mer Film’s rst project, I am yours (2013), and its later project
Out of nature (2015) were both produced through NFI’s fund called Nye veier [New
roads]. To retrieve and take advantage of existing funding opportunities is a necessity
in this business, and both Mer Film and Filmbin have succeeded here.
Both companies also keep few employees as permanent staff and hire more people
during project periods, a normal practice in the movie business that keeps costs low
(DeFillippi & Arthur 2002). The disadvantage of this, of course, is that the knowledge
and resources that accompany a typical project team are not available between projects.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 11/28/17 2:53 PM
119
How to Succeed with Film Production in the Regions?
Geographical location as a nancial and creative resource
In addition to reputation, track record and choice of genre, both companies have some
advantages based on their geographical location. Mer Film interviewees noted that it is
part of their strategy to use the Bergen and Tromsø region as a starting point for choos-
ing collaborators and the kind of stories they want to tell. This local, not-Oslo focus is
also a means of distinguishing the company. The employees at Filmbin always introduce
the company as Filmbin from Lillehammer. While place is evidently an important part
of the branding process, it also represents a nancial and creative resource. As regional
lm companies, Mer Film and Filmbin have access to sources of nancial support that
are unavailable to companies in Oslo, including regional lm funds and lm centers,
but also private funding that is locally inclined. Knowledge of application procedures
and guidelines for funding is important to these companies. Film projects rely on public
funding, and both Mer Film and Filmbin survive largely with revenues gained during
a given production period.
Place also provides some creative advantages. Both companies enjoy superior ac-
cess to regional talents, compelling scenery and region-based stories, and both staffs
expressed the sense of feeling relatively unfettered by whatever might be happening
in Oslo. In an industry that prizes innovation and originality, this free thinking can be
very helpful. They take advantage of local talents, locations and stories, but also think
global when it comes to networking, co-production, and distribution.
Lastly, regional lm companies can contribute to place promotion, which in turn
promotes them as well – an example of this is the television series Lilyhammer (Kong-
srud 2013), which brought attention to Lillehammer itself, and therefore, to an extent,
to Filmbin.
Networking and social capital
Mer Film’s networking happens regionally, in that they consistently link up with local
talents, but it also has a strong international aspect. Examples include the aforementioned
co-productions with lm director Wim Wenders, and the fact that Mexican NDM, the
distribution company of acclaimed lmmaker Carlos Reygadas, distributed the Mer Film
movie Out of Nature internationally. Networking, both regionally and internationally,
allow the company to reach a wider audience, improve earnings and build its brand. Art
house drama is the genre that achieves the widest circulation in Europe, as well, which
is advantageous to Mer Film (Bondebjerg & Redvall 2011: 11).
Strategic networks can provide a company with access to information, resources,
markets and technologies (Zaheer et al. 2000). Ekerhovd stated in the lm magazine
Cinema that Wenders opened doors for Mer Film (Johnsen 2013). Other productive col-
laborations have involved scriptwriters who connected Mer Film to other companies;
Mer Film’s participation in international lm festivals and active pursuit of international
lm company collaborators; and Ekerhovd’s participation in ‘Producers on the move’ at
Cannes in 2011, a talent program that promotes producers and helps them to establish
contacts and networks. Olsberg (2012) describes international cooperation as a key factor
of success in lm, because the lm industry is a global industry and the domestic market
is not often large enough to recoup the costs of making a lm. As a result, international
co-productions have increased in Norway in recent years (Ryssevik 2014: 30).
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 11/28/17 2:53 PM
120
Stine Agnete Sand
When Filmbin was established in Lillehammer in 2004, the lm business was virtu-
ally nonexistent there, and politicians and local businesspeople were supportive. The
lmmakers rented an ofce at an affordable price, and they received useful business
consulting services. As the business grew up around Filmbin, it remained mutually sup-
portive and regionally focused: “We look at each other as colleagues, not competitors”,
says Christian Lo of the lm community in Lillehammer (interview). Filmbanken, which
opened in 2012, is a building in Lillehammer that now houses eleven companies related
to the lm- and television business, including a regional lm center and regional lm
fund. Filmbanken acts as a meeting place and Filmbin’s Aadalen Lo underlines a com-
mitment to stay local whenever possible (interview). For example, Filmbin hired Film-
makeriet, a company based in Filmbanken, to create a ‘behind the movie’ documentary
when it shot the lm The tough guys. Shared objectives, reciprocity and trust are aspects
of social capital, and especially of those networks where participants have the same
goals, have something to give one another, and expect to use one another (Fukuyama
1995, Runyan et al. 2006: 461).
Social capital has provided competitive advantages for Filmbin, and they contribute
to the development of social capital by exchange of services and information. When
Filmbin produced its rst feature lm, Raki, in 2009, only 20 per cent of those in-
volved, were from the region. Four years later, when they produced The tough guys,
80 per cent of the lm workers were from the area. Producer Aadalen Lo further notes
that it is protable to use local lm workers, as they save NOK 50,000 per person in
the budget. To hire non-local lm workers represents more travel expenses and hotel
costs. In addition, Filmbin enhanced the competence of local lm workers by having the
courage to give them new tasks. In the big picture, company staff members think this
competence will strengthen the region as a lm centre, which will also be benecial to
Filmbin. On a short-term basis, the company received a nancial windfall, and a long-
term benet is that it now has more local lm workers with experience from feature
lm production. Filmbin’s commitment to the local lm business could be described
as innovative; it involves trust, risk taking, and using human resources in new ways
(Wiklund 2006).
Risk diversication
According to Olsberg, the ability to take a share of revenues generated by successful
content is the single most important factor in determining a company’s potential for sus-
tainability and growth (Olsberg 2012: 10). To this point, none of Mer Film or Filmbin’s
movies have generated prots that can be invested in new projects, meaning that the
companies must continue to secure funding from external sources. According to Bondeb-
jerg and Redvall, the lm industry will need to be proactive and develop new strategies,
rather than falling back on what they call traditional, defensive strategies (2011: 11).
The traditional market window system that has a lm shown rst in theaters, then via
DVD, pay TV and free TV, is changing, because new digital viewing platforms have
disrupted DVD sales in particular and led to loss of revenue for distribution companies.
As a result, the distribution companies are less willing to take chances. It is now more
difcult for the production companies to get the distribution companies interested in
distributing their lms. In Filmbin’s case, it decided to postpone the lm project From
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 11/28/17 2:53 PM
121
How to Succeed with Film Production in the Regions?
mice to men in 2014. They were supposed to shoot over the summer but put the project
on hold when the distributor pulled out.
Filmbin has chosen not to base their income solely on feature lm production. Con-
tract work gives them a steady supply of capital and is lower in risk than the development
and production of lms (Olsberg 2012: 11). Because of Filmbin’s risk diversication
strategy, they can lean nancially on other assignments.
Entrepreneurship
Although the companies are artistically motivated, they need to survive nancially. Chan-
Olmsted (2008: 170-171) describes strategic entrepreneurship as the way in which com-
panies use their resources to seize opportunities that give them competitive advantages.
Although all staff members at Mer Film discuss strategies, Ekerhovd has the last word. An
entrepreneurial strategy, after all, derives from “the central actor’s concept of his or her
organization’s place in its world. This is coupled with an ability to impose that vision on
the organization through his or her personal control of its actions” (Mintzberg & Waters
1985: 260). At Mer Film, for example, Ekerhovd has hired a nancial manager, which
allows her to concentrate on the creative work and thereby increases the efciency of
the company. This might not sound very innovative, but many production companies are
run by people without specic economic or nancial expertise (Olsberg 2012: 12). Mer
Film also established three companies instead of one. With one company in Bergen and
one in Tromsø, Mer Film can apply for funding from regional institutions in both areas.
Mer Film is also no longer dependent on other distributors, because it started its own
distribution company, Mer Filmdistribusjon, in 2015. This decision was based on both
artistic and nancial needs. By distributing its own lms, Mer Film is able to represent
a project that it has cultivated from the idea stage. An external distributor, on the other
hand, usually arrives later in the process and has many lms to handle.
The idea came from Mer Film’s experience with the lm Out of nature, which in-
cluded a project position funded by Introfondet in Tromsø and Innovation Norway. Mer
Film decided to see whether it could make more money on a lm if it distributed the
lm itself. According to statistics from Film og Kino, the lm sold over twenty thousand
tickets, which the company saw as satisfying compared to their calculations.
Although Mer Film is not the rst company to both produce and distribute lms, it
is a proactive and innovative arrangement that involves risk taking, and it reects the
adaptability and exibility of the company. It took advantage of subsidies that provided
funding for a pilot project to test whether distribution was something it would pursue,
which made starting up the actual distribution company a less risky proposition. Ac-
cording to De Paoli and Hansen (2010), business support for cultural entrepreneurs has
not functioned well in Norway, because the cultural sector responds differently from
other sectors. According to Bille (2013: 169), one might well wonder “whether it is
right to stimulate the cultural sector actively for the purpose of business development,
as the industries have low earnings, and only a few are able to make money”. Other
researchers have pointed out that small companies are often quick to see and exploit
new market opportunities, but they are often hard pressed to sustain this advantage over
time (Chan-Olmsted 2008, Dean et al. 1998). Whether Mer Film will succeed with the
distribution company over a long term remains to be seen.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 11/28/17 2:53 PM
122
Stine Agnete Sand
Organizational culture and leadership
According to Olsberg, it is important for lm companies to have a strong and dynamic
leader who has a vision of how the company should be developed (2012: 12). Mer Film’s
Maria Ekerhovd is a clear leader gure who dictates its vision. Ekerhovd has managed to
cultivate trust within the company staff, which shares her interest in creating artistically
ambitious movies – what they describe as her competence makes them want to work for
her and Mer Film. When asked why Mer Film has thrived, nance and administrative
ofcer Siv Dyb Wangsmo says:
Maria is the main reason. She has a strong inner compass, or intuition, on what works,
plus she is very hardworking. And she takes every bit of this company very seriously,
and follows up the people who are involved. Because she gives so much she also
expects a lot from people around her. It is easy to be engaged by her (interview.)
According to Schein (2010: 219), the founder of a company has the greatest impact
on its organisational culture, and her employees do indicate that Ekerhovd is good at
delegating, and that they learn a lot from her. Each person on staff represents Mer Film
at festivals, which is a way to demonstrate the company’s strength and foster a sense of
ownership and attachment to the company.
Filmbin, interestingly, does not have a leader. Three of the four employees started the
company, and all four are currently co-owners. The staff has cultivated an egalitarian
mindset, with a at organisational structure that allows each of them a voice. Accord-
ing to Tryggestad, this has both advantages and disadvantages: “Sometimes it is a bit
inefcient, because everyone can express their meaning about everything, but it’s very
useful also that everyone can speculate about everything” (interview). This degree of
autonomy and validation can motivate good creative work. Olsberg (2012: 12), how-
ever, observes that many lm companies are owned and driven by creative individuals
“whose principal talents and experience lie in the business of bringing individual lm
projects to fruition. It is not always the case that these same individuals will have the
knowledge and experience to push forward the company`s growth because these are
essentially different things”. As long as the staff is in agreement, a at structure works.
When there are differences, on the other hand, processes can take more time, because
no single person has the authority to make a nal decision.
The employees of both companies are relatively self-motivated and know what to do.
Few employees mean that every person is important, and because the work can change
quickly, these companies rely on exibility as well. Mer Film’s Siv Dyb Wangsmo, for
example, usually works in nance and administration, but occasionally in other areas:
“Sometimes there is much more use for someone who can obtain fake snow, than there is
for someone who can sit with the budget” (interview). She experiences this as a positive
aspect of her position, and it shows that she shares the values of the company and has
an understanding of how people work in the lm business. This exibility also enables
Ekerhovd to include the nance person in the creative work of lmmaking. There is
a culture of sharing and an emphasis on fast communication. Some researchers have
pointed out that there is a lack of training in small business because these companies are
not concerned with growth, or are simply too busy trying to survive (Fuller-Love 2006).
I have found instead that the companies have a “learning by doing” approach, and the
organisational culture consists of shared and largely unspoken understandings. If these
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 11/28/17 2:53 PM
123
How to Succeed with Film Production in the Regions?
understandings emerge from the company’s strategies and dovetail with the professional
environment, the company will be more likely to succeed (Küng 2008: 173).
Conclusion
This article asks what two regional lm companies in Norway, who both produce artisti-
cally ambitious lms, do to succeed and survive. Obviously, there is a huge difference
between the small and fragile lm business in Norway, not to mention the almost non-
existent regional lm business, and major lm hubs in for instance Mumbai, London, or
Los Angeles. Therefore, I have argued that the understanding of the ambiguous concept
“success” must be discussed in relation to context. In this article, success is related to
1) the situation in the lm industry, which in Norway is recognized by low earnings and
low production volume, 2) art as capital, which means that, for these companies, the
realization of artistically ambitious projects is more important than protability and 3)
access to public funding, which makes it possible to pursue these projects.
In addition, media products are not standardized, but instead based on creative
processes and industry knowledge (Chan-Olmsted 2008: 174). This means that small
companies like Filmbin and Mer Film, which do not have much capital, are still able to
succeed if they exploit the unique creative resources they possess. Based on the afore-
mentioned context, I argue that the two companies have succeeded because they have
survived for more than ve years, which is an achievement considered the situation in the
Norwegian lm business. The article shows that human and social capital are important
factors. In addition, geographical location is a factor that gives both companies a com-
petitive advantage. They are well aware of, and take advantage of, local stories, talents,
scenery, not to mention locally inclined support schemes. However, Mer Films’ results
are exceptional in a Norwegian context – in ve years, they have produced six feature
lms and co-produced ve feature lms. The company is innovative, as the start-up of
the distribution company shows. Filmbin is less proactive and willing to take risks, and
therefore chooses risk diversication. Mer Film also attracts talents because of their
reputation, international network and they have a strong leader that can take quick deci-
sions, while Filmbin has a at structure and is more locally oriented. As DeFillippi and
Arthur (1998: 135) argue, human capital (skills) and social capital (work relationships)
form a self-reinforcing cycle of career that can either strengthen a person’s career or
reverse it, depending on performance. Mer Film’s results conrm this, and they have
produced far more lms than Filmbin in a shorter period.
Both companies pursue art, but they also want to secure sustainability, which means
nding ways to survive economically. Art and capital are often discussed as contrasts
(Gran & De Paoli 2005). What is essential is that their creative ambitions come rst;
secondly, they adjust the nancial strategies based upon this goal, and not vice versa.
Discussing success in relation to the small and public funding addicted Norwegian lm
business also poses the question if it makes sense to relate success to protability. As
several studies and the latest national lm policy shows, the emphasis on lm as an
economic product increases. However, how the companies themselves dene success
and see their work does not necessarily coincide with policy goals. Due to the context
in the Norwegian lm business, it makes more sense to relate success to sustainability
and survival, than to protability.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 11/28/17 2:53 PM
124
Stine Agnete Sand
Notes
1. Aida LiPera and Elisa Fernanda Pirir started working for Mer Film after the interviews were conducted.
2. See http://www.merlm.no/about-merlm/. Accessed 28.10.15.
3. See http://rushprint.no/2012/05/for-fa-barnelmsoknader/. Accessed 03.11.15.
4. See http://www.n.no/bransje/vare-tilskuddsordninger/kinolm/etterhandstilskudd. Accessed 09.02.16
References
Banks, Mark (2007). The politics of cultural work. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Barney, Jay (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1):
99-120.
Bille, Trine (2013). How to develop a region through culture and creativity. The foundation Cultiva in Kris-
tiansand, pp. 161-179 in Lindeborg, Lisbeth & Lindkvist, Lars (eds.) The Value of Arts and Culture for
Regional Development. A Scandinavian Perspective. Routledge.
Boccardelli, Paolo, Brunetta, Federica, & Vicentini, Francesca (2008). What is critical to success in the movie
industry? A study on key success factors in the Italian motion picture industry. Working Paper No 46.
Dynamics of Institutions and Markets in Europe. Retrieved from www.dime-eu. org/wp14
Bondebjerg, Ib, & Redvall, Eva Nyrup (2011). A Small Region in a Global World. Patterns in Scandinavian
Film and TV Culture. Copenhagen: European Think Tank on Film and Film Policy.
Bruun, Hanne (2014). Eksklusive Informanter. Om interviewet som redskab i produktionsanalysen. Nordi-
com-Information, 36(1): 29-43.
Caldwell, John Thornton (2008). Production culture: industrial reexivity and critical practice in lm and
television. Durham: Duke University Press.
Caves, Richard E. (2003). Contracts between art and commerce. The Journal of Economic Perspectives,
17(2): 73-83.
Chan-Olmsted, Sylvia M. (2008). Issues in strategic management, pp. 161-181 in Handbook of media man-
agement and economics New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Collins, Alan; Hand, Chris, & Snell, Martin C. (2002). What makes a blockbuster? Economic analysis of lm
success in the United Kingdom. Managerial and Decision Economics, 23(6): 343-354.
Dean, Thomas J., Brown, Robert L., & Bamford, Charles E. (1998). Differences in large and small rm
responses to environmental context: Strategic implications from a comparative analysis of business
formations. Strategic management journal, 19(8): 709-728.
DeFillippi, Robert J., & Arthur, Michael B. (1998). Paradox in project-based enterprise: The case of lm
making. California management review, 40(2): 125-139.
DeFillippi, Robert J., & Arthur, Michael B. (2002). 15 Paradox in Project-based Enterprise: The Case of Film
Making. Managing Innovation and Change, 189.
Deuze, Mark (2011). Managing media work. London: SAGE.
Fombrun, Charles, & Astley, Graham W. (1983). Beyond corporate strategy. Journal of Business Strategy,
3(4): 47-54.
Foss, Nicolai J. (1998). The resource-based perspective: an assessment and diagnosis of problems. Scandi-
navian Journal of management, 14(3): 133-149.
Fukuyama, Francis (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of democracy. New York: The Free
Press Paperbacks.
Fuller-Love, Nerys (2006). Management development in small rms. International Journal of Management
Reviews, 8(3): 175-190.
Gibcus, P., & Kemp, R. G. M. (2003). Strategy and small rm performance: SCALES SCientic AnaLysis
of Entrepreneurship and SMEs.
Ginsburgh, Victor (2003). Awards, success and aesthetic quality in the arts. The Journal of Economic Per-
spectives, 17(2): 99-111.
Gran, AnneBritt., & Paoli, Donatella de (2005). Kunst og kapital: nye forbindelser mellom kunst, estetikk og
næringsliv [Art and capital: new connections between art, esthetique and business]. Oslo: Pax Forlag.
Hanlon, D., & Scott, M. G. (1993). Strategy formation in the entrepreneurial small rm. Scottish Enterprise
Foundation.
Hesmondhalgh, David, & Baker, Sarah (2011). Creative labour: media work in three cultural industries.
London: Routledge.
Hirsch, Paul M. (1972). Processing fads and fashions: An organization-set analysis of cultural industry systems.
American journal of sociology, 77(4): 639-659.
Johnsen, F. (2013). Kjerringa mot strømmen [The old woman against the stream]. Cinema.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 11/28/17 2:53 PM
125
How to Succeed with Film Production in the Regions?
Jones, C. (1996). Careers in project networks: The case of the lm industry, pp. 58-75 in Arthur, Michael B. &
Rousseau, Denise M. The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organizational era.
Jones, C., & DeFillippi, Robert J. (1996). Back to the future in lm: Combining industry and self-knowledge
to meet the career challenges of the 21st century. The Academy of Management Executive, 10(4): 89-103.
Kongsrud, T. (2013). Regional lm- og tv-produksjon som katalysator for reiseliv og omdømme. (Master
thesis), Lillehammer University College, Lillehammer.
Litman, B. R., & Kohl, L. S. (1989). Predicting nancial success of motion pictures: The’80s experience.
Journal of Media Economics, 2(2): 35-50.
Lotz, A. D. (2009). Industry-Level Studies and the Contributions of Gitlin’ s Inside Prime Time. In Mayer,
Vicki; Banks, Miranda J. & John Thornton Caldwell (eds.) Production Studies. Cultural Studies of Media
Industries. New York: Routledge.
NFI. (2015). Annual report. Oslo: The Norwegian Film Institute.
Olsberg, J. (2012). Building sustainable lm businesses: the challenges for industry and government. London:
Olsberg SPI.
de Paoli, Donnatella, & Hansen, T. (2010). Competence About Public Measures Directed Towards the Cultural
Industries – an evaluation of the Norwegian Art Council and State Innovation Bureau. Oslo.
Penrose, Edith (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Oxford: Blackwell.
Picard, Robert G. (2002). The economics and nancing of media companies: Fordham Univ Press.
Runyan, R. C., Huddleston, P., & Swinney, J. (2006). Entrepreneurial orientation and social capital as small
rm strategies: A study of gender differences from a resource-based view. The International Entrepre-
neurship and Management Journal, 2(4): 455-477.
Ryssevik, Jostein; Dahle, Malin, Høgestøl, Asle, & Myhrvold-Hanssen, Thomas (2014). Åpen framtid – en
utredning om økonomien og pengestrømmene i lmbransjen. Bergen: Ideas2evidence.
Schein, Edgar H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Simonton, Dean Keith (2009). Cinematic success criteria and their predictors: The art and business of the lm
industry. Psychology & marketing, 26(5): 400-420.
St.meld. 30 (2014-2015). En framtidsrettet lmpolitikk [A provident lm policy]. Oslo: Det kongelige kul-
turdepartementet Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/meld.-st.-30-20142015/
id2413867/sec1.
Stahl, Matt (2009). Privilege and Distinction in Production Worlds: Copyright, Collective Bargaining, and
Working Conditions in Media Making. In Mayer, Vicki; Banks, Miranda J., & John T. Caldwell, (ed.)
Production Studies. Cultural Studies of Media industries. New York: Routledge.
Wernerfelt, Birger (1984). A resource-based view of the rm. Strategic management journal, 5(2): 171-180.
Wiklund, Johan (2006). The sustainability of the entrepreneurial orientation – performance relationship.
Entrepreneurship and the growth of rms, 141-155.
Zaheer, Akbar; Gulati, Ranjay, & Nohria, Nitin (2000). Strategic networks. Strategic management journal,
21(3): 203.
STINE AGNETE SAND, Ph.D. student, Lillehammer University College, stine.eira@uit.no
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 11/28/17 2:53 PM
