Beyond The Creative Industries - Nesta
Technical report: February 2008Beyond the creativeindustries:Mapping the creative economyin the United KingdomPeter Higgs, Stuart Cunningham and Hasan Bakhshi
Executive summaryThe creative industries are one of the mostimportant contributors to the UK economy.So it is important that we accurately measuretheir contribution to economic activity. Doingso can help both policymakers and industryprofessionals to communicate key concepts,share reliable data and make the case forgreater investment.radio and TV, news agencies and publishing, aswell as jewellery manufacture and museums.There have been renewed attempts to estimatethe true size of the creative economy. TheDepartment for Culture Media and Sport(DCMS) and the Greater London Authority(GLA) both published studies in 2007. Thisreport complements their work and seeks toimprove on the available data about the trueextent of creative activity within the economy.From the 2001 census data, we can identify26 creative occupation groups. They include:town planners and graphic designers;advertising managers and furniture makers;actors and librarians; journalists and softwareprofessionals; architects and archivists. Theseoccupation groups have evolved over the years,as some professions did not feature in the 1981or 1991 censuses. Those working in creativejobs do not always work in creative industries.The DCMS estimates that in 2006 there were800,000 creative jobs outside the creativeindustries adding to the estimated 1.1 millionpeople working in the creative industries.What are the creative industries?The Creative TridentThe creative industries have been hamperedby multiple definitions and a lack of consistenttreatment on what is classified as creativeactivity. The DCMS defines the creativeindustries as those “which have their origin inindividual creativity, skill and talent and whichhave a potential for wealth and job creationthrough the generation and exploitation ofintellectual property”. It identifies thirteendifferent sectors.The model of a ‘Creative Trident’ bringstogether those working in the creativeindustries and those working in specialistcreative jobs in other firms and organisations.By developing this model, we can analyse thetrue number of people employed in creativeactivities and industries and their averageincomes.The 2001 household census – the most recentcensus conducted in the UK – allows elevencreative industries to be identified, coveringboth businesses that create cultural ‘products’including the arts, films and interactivegames, and those providing business-tobusiness services in areas such as architecture,advertising, marketing and design, and weband software development. The term embracesWe focus on three types of employment:‘specialist’ artists, professionals or creativeindividuals working in creative industries;‘support’ staff in those industries providingmanagement, secretarial, administrative oraccountancy back-up; and creative individuals‘embedded’ in other industries not defined as‘creative’. Collectively, they are the ‘creativeworkforce’.3
For our model, we have further segmented thisworkforce into six classifications: advertisingand marketing; architecture, visual arts anddesign; film, TV, radio and photography; musicand performing arts; publishing; and software,computer games and electronic publishing.These groups include creative people workingin other industries.How our model is differentCCI originally developed this model in 2005for Australia. It differs from previous models inthree key respects: it uses population data (thenumber of people employed in each occupationwithin every industry) to provide more accurateestimates; it employs a conservative approachto the selection of ‘creative’ occupations andindustries, to avoid overreach and enable bettercomparability between the segments and tothe economy as a whole; and it allows us, forthe first time, to estimate creative incomes.However, to compensate for difficulties withthe frequency and level of aggregation ofUK census data, our methodology combinespopulation data with that provided by theLabour Force Survey (LFS).To ensure that the estimates are as robustas possible – and that we can make validcomparisons – we have focused on those whoadd most creative value to a process, excludingsuch activities as the manufacture of TV sets ormusical instruments that employ small numbersof creative professionals. By doing so, we find,for example, that in 2001 only 37 per cent ofthose employed in publishing were in creativeoccupations; the same applies to 46 per cent ofthose in advertising or 44 per cent in radio andTV activities.We have also excluded those occupationswhich are ostensibly creative but whichhave very low rates of employment withinthe creative industries. Using this sort ofdefinition, we exclude 14 groups included inDCMS calculations – including public relationsofficers, ICT managers and printers – but addfive new groups, including draughtspersons,software professionals and librarians.Why this is a better modelThis model offers policymakers five advantagesover other models. First, it focuses on core creative added value,excluding activities in related chains that arenot central to the creative process, such asdistribution or retailing. Second, it enables us better to map theextent of creative individuals working inother sectors. Third, it distinguishes between creativeindividuals and others who work in creativeindustries, a useful tool for skills andbusiness development. Fourth, it uses census data rather thansample surveys, wherever possible. And finally, it enables us to determine thetotal personal earnings arising from creativeemployment, a useful indicator of itseconomic value.Table 1: The UK Creative Employment Trident for 2001 based on CCI analysis of ONS census data.Employmentwithin CreativeIndustriesEmploymentTotalwithin non-Creative EmploymentIndustriesEmbeddedProportionEmployment in specialistCreative Occupations552,170645,06754%Employment in Businessand Support Occupations690,641Total Employment1,242,811Specialist Proportion44%UK Employment 200141,197,237690,641645,0671,887,87863%34%
Table 2: Long–run growth rates of creative employment in the UK workforce 1981-2006 based onCCI analysis using census and LFS data.ModeCensus19811991200120-YearAverageGrowthLFS 5%585,1112.9%Creative ve %Creative 2%UK workforce22,866,100 23,452,230 26,575,780 0.8%28,165,612 0.8%Embedded share ofCreative employment51%47%34%35%Creative employment as 3.9%Share of UK workforce4.8%7.1%7.0%Our main findingsThe creative economy accounts for over 7 percent of UK employment, consistent with theofficial estimates: In 2001, creative employmentaccounted for almost 1.9 million people or 7.1per cent of UK employment, a very similar levelto that determined by the DCMS EconomicEstimates for the same period using a differentmethodology, definition and datasets. Table 1shows how this is broken down within our Tridentcategories.Creative employment has grown stronglyover the long run: Census and LFS datatogether suggest that UK creative employmentgrew by 3.2 per cent per annum from 1981to 2006, compared with 0.8 per cent for thebroader UK economy (Table 2). The highestgrowth rates have been among ‘specialist’creative workers within the creative industries,which have grown on average since 1981 by6.2 per cent. However, since 2001 overallgrowth slowed to 1.0 per cent, just below theUK workforce annual rate of 1.2 per cent forthe same period.When we compare our estimates with those inthe DCMS Economic Estimates, our estimatessuggest more people working in the creativeindustries (in 2001, 1.2 million people versus1.1 million) and lower levels of embeddedemployment (645,000 versus 787,400).Because we can show where the embeddedemployment occurs across the broadereconomy, we feel that the CCI calculations arethe more robust.When we break these data down into ourcreative segments, we find the largest growthhas been, perhaps unsurprisingly, in thesoftware, computer games and electronicpublishing segment, which only accountedfor 14 per cent of the creative workforce in1981, but now accounts for 31 per cent, andhas grown by an average 6.5 per cent a yearbetween 1981 and 2006 (although growthfrom 1981-2001 was an even stronger 8.0 percent per annum).This segment is closely followed in growthterms by advertising and marketing, up from 5per cent to 11 per cent of creative employmentsince 1981, or 6.3 per cent annual growth.Music and the performing arts has maintaineda 10 per cent share of employment, with 3.5per cent annual growth. But architecture,visual arts and design; film, TV, radio andphotography; and publishing, while growingby over 1 per cent in employment terms eachyear, have become less important in creativeemployment overall.5
Table 3: The mean annual income of the creative segments and modes of employment for 2006based on CCI analysis of LFS iveOccupations IndustriesCreativeEmploymentAdvertising andMarketing 24,370 35,900 23,550 27,420 29,590 26,480Architecture, VisualArts and Design 23,090 26,000 30,600 24,370 27,110 25,130Film, TV, Radio andPhotography 23,100 30,730 32,520 29,480 31,340 30,400Music andPerforming Arts 14,480 24,940 21,450 22,740 22,440 21,880Publishing 18,490 25,410 21,050 23,020 23,360 22,300Software, ComputerGames and ElectronicPublishing 34,810 39,150 39,600 36,730 39,360 37,560All Creative Segments 26,750 30,750 28,800 28,750 29,860 28,770Note: Mean annual income for UK economy as a whole is 21,060Creative incomes are higher thanaverage: Creative incomes were on averageapproximately 37 per cent higher than in theUK economy as a whole in 2006. But they havegrown at the slower rate of 2.5 per cent perannum since 2001, compared with 3.5 per centfor the total workforce. Creative occupationsgenerated over 40 billion in salaries andwages in 2006, while support staff in creativeindustries earned an extra 16.8 billion.Such embedded creative employment isgreatest in the ‘manufacturing’ , ‘real estate’,‘business activities’, ‘wholesale and retailtrade’, and ‘financial intermediation’ industrygroupings. Relative to the size of their overallworkforces, outside industry groupingswhich include creative industries, embeddedcreative workers appear to be more importantin financial intermediation than in any otherindustry grouping.Overall, the creative workforce earned 9.6per cent of all UK earnings. Their earningswere above average, with those in software,computer games and electronic publishingemployment – particularly support workers –earning most. As Table 3 shows, the earnings ofembedded music and publishing workers werebelow the average for the UK as a whole.This analysis contains many useful insights.We can see how important advertising andmarketing jobs are to real estate or researchand development activities, for example, orthe significance of creative ICT occupationsto legal, accounting and business consultancyservices. We can also measure employmentgrowth or losses more accurately within eachsector, and the extent of embedded creativeemployment from one year to the next.More creative people work outside thecreative industries than inside them:Compared with other economic activities,creative employment occurs disproportionatelyoutside the creative industries themselves, afinding consistent with other NESTA research.Some 35 per cent of the total creativeworkforce (a figure that includes supportstaff in creative industries) is employed innon-creative sectors. This level is similar tothe 39 per cent of total UK financial servicesworkforce employed in non-financial servicesindustries in 2001.6Such data also provide an important lessonto policymakers: they should recognise thelimitations of using industry-based approachesalone to supporting the creative economy.Applying the methodology to financialservicesThe methodology used for creative industriescan as readily be applied to financial services,
allowing a comparison between the twosectors.This is particulary interesting in the light ofrecent research which has indicated that thecreative industries are as large as the financialservices sector in the UK. The FinancialTrident – including those working in financialprofessions outside the financial services sector– encompasses two million people, 150,000more than the Creative Trident. Two thirds ofthe 1.2 million specialists work outside the coreFinancial Services industry.By studying changes within the Trident we cansee, for example, the impact of computerisationand ATMs, where clerks, tellers and bookkeepers fell from 2.3 million people to 1.2million people between 1981 and 1991. Therole of financial consultants is also apparentwhen we break down the embedded financialworkers by sector: they account for manyof the almost 300,000 financial specialistsemployed in ‘real estate, renting and businessactivities’.Intriguingly, we find that sectors making useof financial expertise are also more likely toemploy creative specialists, perhaps suggestingbase level service requirements for efficientworking in the 21st century.Difficulties with UK dataUK data have significant limitations. There is no single dataset with the full rangeof employment and earnings information,unlike US, Canadian, New Zealand andAustralian statistics. LFS data for smaller occupational andindustry groups are less robust than censusdata. The LFS is equally restrictive in its levelof data, partly due to its comparativelylimited sample size: approximately 350,000individuals in 2006.These factors lead to greater margins oferror than is the case with Creative Tridentscalculated in Australia and New Zealand. Weneed to see better data available in the futurewithin the UK.Recommendations for improvingthe dataWe have been able to compare theeffectiveness of the Creative Trident in bothAustralia and the UK, and this offers us lessonson how the UK data could be improved. TheDCMS and the Office for National Statisticsshould work together to provide better dataand improve the usefulness of their datasets. It should be possible to improve informationwithin datasets by increasing the resolution– the extent to which we can drill down thedata into smaller subsets – and providingfiner classifications in the census 2001 datawhere more than 50,000 are employed in asingle industry. The sample size of the Labour ForceSurvey should be increased to improveits accuracy and to allow for more detailabout occupations within industries. A morefrequent census of those in work includingtheir income or a much bigger LFS should beconducted at least every five years. A stronger metrics culture would benefitfrom greater access to the source data for allofficial reports. Source data for the DCMSEconomic Estimates and this report shouldbe available for others to build on andchallenge. Census and LFS data should befully downloadable. There is no census and LFS information onthe earnings of the self-employed, in a sectorwhere 28 per cent of people with creativeoccupations are thus employed. UK census data can also be dated as theinformation is only collected every ten years. There are too few industry classificationsrelevant to the creative industries comparedwith other countries, and the level of detailis often restricted, even in large occupationalgroups.7
AcknowledgementsThis report was written by Peter Higgs (Senior Research Fellow, CCI), Professor Stuart Cunningham(Director, CCI) and Hasan Bakhshi (Senior Policy Analyst, NESTA). The Creative Trident methodologyused in this paper was developed by CCI. CCI is the Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries andInnovation at the Queensland University of Technology in Australia (www.cci.edu.au).Additional contibutions were made by Jason Potts and John Hartley (CCI) and Kate Morrison(Volterra Consulting Ltd). Ed Pickering (DCMS) and Conor Ryan made helpful suggestions.8
ContentsPart 1: Purpose and structure of report161.1The role of mapping studies161.2The Creative Trident methodology161.3The structure of the report16Part 2: Terminology and assumptions182.1Terminology182.2Assumptions21Part 3: Existing analyses of creative activities22Industry-based studies3.1.1The 1998 and 2001 DCMS Mapping Documents3.1.2Limitations in DCMS Mapping Documents3.1.3The DCMS Evidence Toolkit3.1.4Capturing creativity2222222323Capturing industry and occupation3.2.1Methodological constraints of the approach3.2.2Classification selection and embedded employment242526Part 4: The Creative Trident methodology274.1Defining the creative core274.2Advantages of the Creative Trident approach4.2.1Avoidance of overreach and robustness4.2.2Disaggregation of embedded employment4.2.3Breakdown of specialist and support employment4.2.4Use of population data4.2.5Use of earnings data4.2.6Applying the Creative Trident to UK data323232323233334.3Overarching UK data limitations4.3.1No single dataset provides the basic information required4.3.2Limited coverage of the self-employed3434344.4Census data issues4.4.1Ten-year frequency of UK census4.4.2Low resolution of industry and occupation classifications3434344.5Labour Force Survey dataset limitations4.5.1Survey basis results in the suppression of much of thedetailed data4.5.2Improved but still low resolution of classifications, especiallyindustry35353.13.2359
4.5.34.5.4No income data available for the self-employedLack of comparability of LFS data with census employment atthe detailed levels4.6Methodology to address UK data issues4.6.12001 census dataset4.6.21981 and 1991 census datasets3535364.7Conclusion38Part 5: UK Creative Trident results395.1UK Creative Employment Tridents: 1981, 1991 and 20015.1.1Growth rates in UK creative employment5.1.2Comparison with DCMS estimates3941425.2Creative Income Tridents: 2001 to 2006435.3Comparing creative incomes with UK average earnings5.3.1Summary of five-year growth rates45465.4UK Whole-Economy Trident5.4.1The distribution of embedded creative employment innon-creative industries, 2001 to 20065.4.2The growth in creative employment within non-creativeindustries4646Part 6: Applying the Trident methodology to Financial Services516.1Parallels with the Creative TridentPart 7: Conclusion: Main findings and implications4853557.1Main findings557.2Implications: Improvement of data7.2.1Data coverage and timeliness7.2.2Data classifications: resolution and dimensions7.2.3Dimensionality7.2.4Accessibility and consistency7.2.5Implications of the UK Creative Trident mapping for data quality565657575757Creative industries articulated into innovation policy58Appendix 1:Selected creative occupations and industries: Census and LFS59Appendix 2:The alignment between the detailed census and LFS employment data63Appendix 3:The impact of excluding second jobs from LFS-based analyses65Appendix 4:The Disaggregating of 7420 Architecture and Engineering Servicesin the LFS dataset69Appendix 5:The impact of classifications on creative employment measures71Appendix 6:Top ten occupations employed in each creative industry73Appendix 7:Top ten industries of employment of creative occupations787.3103535
Appendix 8:Results of applying the Trident methodology to Australian datasets89Appendix 9:Self-employment rates within the creative occupations and industries93Appendix 10:Mapping creative industry-relevant census SIC to LFS SIC codes96Appendix 11:Coding Lists97Appendix 12:Census 2001 – Disaggregating the data records of two industryclassifications98Appendix 13:Detailed tables and comparisons with DCMS Economic Estimates101Appendix 14:Embeddedness by two-digit industries106Appendix 15:The use of the Trident Methodology with alternative definitions11111
List of tables12Table 1: The UK Creative Employment Trident for 2001 based on CCI analysis of ONScensus data.4Table 2: Long-run growth rates of creative employment in the UK workforce 1981-2006based on CCI analysis using census and LFS data.5Table 3: The mean annual income of the creative segments and modes of employment for2006 based on CCI analysis of LFS data.6Table 4: The 11 creative industries selected from the 2001 census data.18Table 5: Creative occupations selected from the 2001 census data.19Table 6: The correlation between CCI segments and DCMS Economic Estimates sectors.20Table 7: Classifications used to determine the creative core industries using census andLFS data and the percentage of employment that is within creative occupations.29Table 8: Creative core occupations used in census and LFS datasets and thepercentage of employment occuring within creative industries in 2001.30Table 9: Creative industry–relevant classifications from the 2001 census.36Table 10: Creative employment-relevant industry and occupation classifications from the1981 and 1991 censuses.37Table 11: The UK Creative Employment Trident for 1981 from the census.39Table 12: The UK Creative Employment Trident for 1991 from the census.40Table 13: The UK Creative Employment Trident for 2001 from the census.40Table 14: The long-run growth rates of creative employment and the UK workforce1981 to 2001 from census data and 2002 to 2006 from LFS data.41Table 15: Comparison of CCI employment estimates with those in DCMS EconomicEstimates.42Table 16: The segment shares overall of creative employment for 1981 to 2006 andlong-run growth rates of employment.43Table 17: The Creative Income Trident: total value of annual earnings generatedthrough creative workforce salaries and wages for 2001 to 2006.44Table 18: The mean annual income of the creative segments and the modes ofemployment for 2006.44Table 19: Comparison of mean incomes of creatives with the UK mean in 2006.45Table 20: Annualised growth rates over 2001 to 2006 of employment, earnings andmean income of the creative segments and the UK workforce.46Table 21: UK employment as at 2001 census by Industry Division.47Table 22: Looking within Division K: The extent of specialist and embedded employment.48Table 23: The change in the embedded share of employment by Division between1981 and 2001.49Table 24: The change in the embedded share of employment by Division between2001 and 2006.50
Table 25: The UK Financial Employment Trident for 2001.51Table 26: Employment within the UK Financial Employment Trident from 1981 to 2001.52Table 27: 2001 UK Financial Employment Trident by Industry Division.53Table 28: Comparison of financial and creative embedded shares by Industry Division.54Table 29: Comparison of the number of industry classifications in use in Australia,UK and USA.56Table 30: Comparison of the number of occupation classifications in use in Australia,UK and USA.57Table 31: Core creative industries selected from those used in the 2001 census.59Table 32: Core creative industries selected from those used in the 1981 and 1991 censuses.59Table 33: Core creative occupations selected from those used in the 2001 census.60Table 34: Core creative occupations selected from those used in the 1991 census.61Table 35: Core creative occupations selected from those used in the 1981 and 1991 censuses. 62Table 36: The number of people with second jobs and main jobs in creative occupationsfor 2006.65Table 37: The number of people with second jobs and main jobs in creativesegments for 2006.66Table 38: The ratio of the number of people with second jobs to those with main jobs increative occupations and industries for 2006.67Table 39: The number of people employed in main and second creative jobs byoccupation and industry segments for 2006.68Table 40: The allocation of creative occupations across two disaggregated industries.69Table 41: Disaggregating 7420 Architecture and Engineering Services from 2001 to 2006.70Table 42: The number of classifications available in the 2006 Australian census formeasuring the creative segments.71Table 43: The impact of the change in classifications on the measurement of creativeemployment in Australia.72Table 44: The top ten occupations within each candidate creative industry using 2001census classifications and data.73Table 45: The top ten industries for each candidate creative occupation using 2001census classifications and data.78Table 46: The top ten industries for the ‘2126 Design and development engineers’occupation using 2001 census classifications and data.88Table 47: The top ten industries for the ‘5499 Hand Craft occupations not elsewhereclassified’ occupation using 2001 census classifications and data.88Table 48: Total Australian creative employment 1996, 2001 and 2006 and the 10-yearannualised growth rate.89Table 49: Embedded employment’s share of creative employment by segment between1996, 2001 and 2006 and the 10-year annualised growth rate.90Table 50: Australian mean annual income of people within the Creative Trident comparedwith the mean of their Division of employment.92Table 51: The rate of self-employed in ‘Main Jobs’ in UK creative industries 2006.9513
14Table 52: The correlation between employment in the 2001 LFS four-digit industryclassification and the 2001 census classification.96Table 53: Occupations included in ‘1134 Advertising and public relations managers’ and‘2131 IT strategy and planning professionals’.97Table 54: The more detailed industry classifications within ‘72 Computer and relatedactivities’ available from LFS datasets.98Table 55: The summary disaggregation matrix for ‘72 Computer and related activities’.99Table 56: The blend of occupations employed within ‘742 Architectural and engineering’.99Table 57: The summary disaggregation matrix for ‘742 Architectural and engineering’.100Table 58: Creative segments’ specialist, support and embedded employment for 1981.101Table 59: Creative segments’ specialist, support and embedded employment for 1991.102Table 60: Creative segments’ specialist, support and embedded employment for 2001.102Table 61: Creative segments’ specialist, support and embedded employment for 2006.103Table 62: The 25 sub-divisions with the highest proportion of embedded employment2001 UK census data.106Table 63: Growth in embedded creative employment across the industry sub-sectors.107Table 64: The changes in the creative embedded share of two-digit industries’ employmentbetween 2001 and 2006 using LFS data.109Table 65: The classifications selected in the Cultural Industries definition and the numberof people employed in 1981, 1991 and 2001.111Table 66: The classifications selected in the Cultural Occupations definition and thenumber of people employed in 1981.113Table 67: The classifications selected in the Cultural Occupations definition and thenumber of people employed in 1991.113Table 68: The classifications selected in the Cultural Occupations definition and thenumber of people employed in 2001.114Table 69: Cultural Trident in 1981 for each segment and mode.114Table 70: Cultural Trident in 1991 for each segment and mode.115Table 71: Cultural Trident in 2001 for each segment and mode.115Table 72: Long-run annualised growth in Cultural Trident employment between1981 and 2001.115
List of figuresFigure 1: DCMS estimates for 1998 to 2006 of sectoral employment within thecreative industries and total employment.23Figure 2: Frequency of discrepancy between census and LFS employment – industryclassifications.61Figure 3: Frequency of discrepancy between census and LFS employment – occupationclassifications.62Figure 4: The variation in the distribution of employment within the weekly income bandsfor each of the creative segments compared with Australian employment.89Figure 5: The self-employment rate of creative occupation segments in 2006.91Figure 6: The self-employment rate of disaggregated creative occupation segments in 2006.93Figure 7: Comparison of the CCI employment estimates for each segment with those ofthe DCMS Economic Estimates.102Figure 8: Comparison of the shares of segment employment estimates from CCI withthose of the DCMS Economic Estimates.103Figure 9: Comparison of the average annual incomes of specialist, support and embeddedcreatives within each segment with that of the national average for 2001 to 2006.10315
Part 1: Purpose and structure of report1.1 The role of mapping studies1. Frontier Economics Ltd(2007) ‘Creative IndustryPerformance.’ [Online].Available at: http://headshift.com/dcms/mt/archives/blog 36/1%20-%20StatisticalAnalysis of the CreativeIndustries.ppt [Last accessed21/09/2007].2. Alan Freeman, GLA Economics(2007) ‘Working Paper 22:London’s Creative SectorUpdate.’ London: GLA.[Online]. Available at: http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/economic unit/docs/wp 22creative.pdf [Last accessed5/10/2007].Mapping studies are valuable tools forpolicymakers and industry professionals alike.They are a vital resource for the communicationof key concepts and data. They may alsopotentially be used to construct an evidencebase to inform government investment.The development of a robust methodology iscritical to achieving these aims. Undervaluinga sector most obviously affects its ability tosecure supportive policy measures or to attractadditional external investment. Overstating thesector’s significance by, for example, adopting aloose definition of its activities is potentially noless damaging if it leads to a loss of credibilitythat turns policymakers off.Improving the methodology used to constructestimates of the size of the UK’s creativeeconomy is a topic of ongoing interest topolicymakers, driven in part by the CreativeEconomy Programme of the DCMS in the UK.In 2007, two major published studies havefocused on this area: Frontier Economics’Statistical Analysis of the Creative Industries,1which develops a more nuanced definitionof the industry than in the curr
activities and industries and their average incomes. We focus on three types of employment: 'specialist' artists, professionals or creative individuals working in creative industries; 'support' staff in those industries providing management, secretarial, administrative or accountancy back-up; and creative individuals
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
2. Measuring employment in these creative occupations in each sector to identify those that can be classified as creative industries We support the use of employment as an identifying measure of the creative industries, as part of this methodology, not least because it puts creative talent and skills at the heart of the creative industries.
down your commitment to practice jazz piano, tell it to others, and schedule in specific practice times. MONTH ONE: Jazz Piano 101 A. Chord types (Play each in all keys) 2 B. Quick Fix Voicing C. ETUDE: (Quick fix voicings with inversions for better voice leading) ALL MUSICAL EXAMPLES TAKEN FROM “JAZZ PIANO HANDBOOK” (ALFRED PUBLISHING) AND USED WITH PERMISSION MONTH TWO: Position .
