Life is change. But we actually have neurochemical brain processes that resist change.
Burningman has continual slow change, but at times has made radical design changes to redirect the event.
-The city was redesigned into the open C to encourage interaction because the esplanade was the shortest route. Esplanade camps were selected to encourage interactivity. Center camp was created as a meetup and services center. 3&9 Plazas, the same.
-Guns and explosions were phased out for safety reasons and replaced by art projects which involved vastly larger numbers of participants in their making.
-The LLC was formed because no one else could deal with the legalities, business aspects, and government relations.
-Regionals launched. They could carry on if the main event ceased, provide additional cash flow, and provide a local year round focus.
Sure you can think of more.
How tickets are distributed can be a new orienting force for change. It can be used as a design opportunity to change the theme camp mix and mission, MV mix, sound camps, art mix, volunteer services mix/quality, green/sustainability elements and a myriad of cultural elements. And it can do so while supporting incremental organic evolution.
I'd suggest the org employ some ethnographers and designers to help them design the event for the long now, taking into account a permanent condition of ticket scarcity, income inequality, internationalization, and an aging participant demographic.
The financial elements of the LLC exit is a factor, suggest the new board operate together with the LLC in the overlap time to craft the long term vision.
Any social scientists, ethnographers, and people who like to think about that stuff out there?
increasing the signal to noise ratio with compassion