The Burden of "Outcomes" -- A Broto dilemma
It’s one of the first questions we get: What will this collaboration achieve?

Indeed, with Broto’s high-minded mission being “artists and scientists collaborating to address anthropogenic climate change,” our audience might wonder about what gains, remedies and innovations will come of it. We wonder, too.

The unknown is what piques our curiosity, our imaginations and our creativity. It inspires. And, with all that is known about the climate change threat, including the lack of urgent response to the scale of the threat, we are as excited as you to see what develops.

We hope – and hope is a key Broto quality — that whatever evolves from the Broto collaborations is amazing, inspiring and compelling in moving us toward a more urgent, informed response to the human-made climate change threat.

However, what we get is maybe less important that how we get it.

What is natural, but entirely unhelpful, is a need to outline the outcome of these collaborations before they have begun. What will the artists create? What science findings will change the tide? How will our minds be blown by this shared process work?

That’s a lot of pressure before we have even begun — and a creative buzz killer that we hope to avoid from the outset.

Our Broto collaborations are about intentions versus outcomes.

While we hope for groundbreaking science and art over the long-term, the focus is on innovative ideas that come from the process of “value-add partners” co-creating art and science.

The burden of defining outcomes takes the focus off of creating a comprehensive, supportive and expansive collaboration process that allows innovation to flourish. We’re not forcing innovation, but creating an arena where it might be properly fostered.

Our collaborating artists and scientists are not are required to do anything more than engage enthusiastically and openly in a process of mutual, real-time, substantive and credible art and science collaborations. We want them to document how it goes, where it goes and where the benefits are.

So, to be clear, the Broto output will be processes, ideas, insights and innovations about collaboration with the potential benefit of work that changes the world.

What’s a reasonable outcome? Perhaps, it is new and better questions.

We think that the world needs a greater sense of “discovery” and Broto’s goal is to let discovery happen without flipping to the last page of the book.

Our Broto mantra: “Merging the most diverse perspectives yields the richest synthesis of ideas.”

The influence of a new collaborative approach is something that might positively affect other issues. What issues might this approach work to energize, reboot, or remake – along with climate change?

Share your thoughts.