Journal of Cultural Economics

, Volume 40, Issue 1, pp 29–74 | Cite as

Breaking up is hard to do: the resilience of the rock group as an organizational form for creating music

Original Article

Abstract

Though there is a long tradition of band members quitting the group or taking a hiatus, the rock group as an organization to produce music continues to be both popular and economically viable. The research question addressed in this paper is whether or not it is a good idea to quit or take a hiatus from the group. We begin with a discussion of the framework for understanding why groups are formed and why they may be difficult to keep together. We then discuss differences between groups in the decade of the 1960s versus today. We argue that there is something unique about the output of the group even with the changes in the structure of contracts, compensation, and consumer focus on the artist that explain the resilience of the rock band as an organizational form within which to create music. We compare the charting success of bands that have members leave the group with the charting success of the members who left the group. We identified the groups in five representative years: 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995, and 2005. We then analyzed the entire Billboard Hot 100 charting careers of those groups and the artists who quit those groups. Our main finding is that when charting success is divided equally among members, going solo pays off—there is a clear economic rationale because solo acts have greater average charting success than the original bands they started in. The other ensuing side projects: duos, collaborations, and other groups are not as lucrative as the original bands. These findings are valid for members of charting groups from each of the 5 years examined. Despite the difficulties in keeping a rock band together, there are fewer band breakups today and remaining with the group generally results in a longer and more productive charting career. Thus, the rock group remains an important organization for producing contemporary music. However, there remains a compelling incentive to go solo. Superstars may benefit from solo projects, but for the average, non-superstar group member, in many circumstances it is better for the band to stay together if the income is divided equally.

Keywords

Music industry Entrepreneurship Theory of the firm 

JEL Classification

L26 Z1 

References

  1. Alchian, A. A., & Demsetz, H. (1972). Production, information costs, and economic organization. American Economic Review, 62(5), 777–795.Google Scholar
  2. [Anonymous] (1983). Business rock ‘n’ roll. Business & Society Review, 1983(46), 1–12.Google Scholar
  3. Balestrino, A., & Ciardi, C. (2011). ‘I wish someone would help me write this song’: Or, the efficient allocation of resources in rock bands. Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, 23(1), 53–79.Google Scholar
  4. Biasutti, M. (2012). Group music composing strategies: A case study within a rock band. British Journal of Music Education, 29(03), 343–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bowmaker, S. W., Phillips, R. J., & Johnson, R. D. (2005). Economics of rock ‘n’ roll. In S. W. Bowmaker (Ed.), Economics uncut: A complete guide to life, death and misadventure (pp. 389–421). Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cameron, S. (2006). Rock, pop and judicial efficiency: Economic considerations in the Spandau ballet decisions. Journal Of Interdisciplinary Economics, 17(3), 327–344.Google Scholar
  7. Cameron, S., & Collins, A. (1997). Transaction costs and partnerships: The case of rock bands. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 32(2), 171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ceulemans, C., Ginsburgh, V., & Legros, P. (2011). Rock and Roll bands, (in)complete contracts, and creativity. American Economic Review, 101(3), 217–221. doi:10.1257/aer.101.3.217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Conlon, D. E., & Jehn, K. A. (2009). Part I: Chapter 2: Behind the music: Conflict, performance, longevity, and turnover in punk and new wave rock bands. In M. A. Rahim (Ed.), Current topics in management (pp. 13–48). Center for Advanced Studies in Management. New Brunswick, USA: Transactions PublishersGoogle Scholar
  10. Crain, W., & Tollison, R. D. (1997). Economics and the architecture of popular music. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 32(2), 185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ferguson, H. (2002). In search of bandhood: Consultation with original music groups. Group, 26(4), 267–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frame, P. (1993). Rock family trees. London: Omnibus.Google Scholar
  13. Frank, R. H., & Cook, P. J. (1995). The winner-take-all society: How more and more Americans compete for ever fewer and bigger prizes, encouraging economic waste, income inequality, and an impoverished cultural life. New York; London and Toronto: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  14. Giles, D. E. (2007). Survival of the hippest: Life at the top of the hot 100. Applied Economics Letters, 39(15), 1877–1887. doi:10.1080/00036840600707159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goldenrosen, J., & Beecher, J. (1996). Remembering buddy: The definitive biography. New York: Da Capa Press.Google Scholar
  16. Groce, S. B. (1989). occupational rhetoric and ideology: A comparison of copy and original music performers. Qualitative Sociology, 12(4), 391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Groce, S. B., & Cooper, M. (1990). Just me and the boys? Women in local-level rock and roll. Gender and Society, 220–229. doi:10.1177/089124390004002006.
  18. Groce, S. B., & Dowell, J. A. (1988). A comparison of group structures and processes in two local level rock ‘n’ roll bands. Popular Music & Society, 12(2), 21–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hong, S. (2012). A comment on survival of the hippest: Life at the top of the hot 100. Applied Economics Letters, 19(11), 1101–1105. doi:10.1080/13504851.2011.615722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ivaldi, M., Jullien, B., Rey, P., Seabright, P., & Tirole, J. (2003). The economics of tacit collusion. IDEI working paper 186. http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/studies_reports/the_economics_of_tacit_collusion_en.pdf.
  21. Marshak, J., & Radner, R. (1972). Economic theory of teams. Cowles Foundation for Research at Yale University, monograph 22. http://cowles.econ.yale.edu/P/cm/m22/m22-all.pdf. (Accessed July 15, 2014).
  22. Murnighan, J., & Conlon, D. E. (1991). The dynamics of intense work groups: A study of British string quartets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 165–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nichols, D. (2007). The singer, not the song. Perfect Beat, 8(2), 44–61.Google Scholar
  24. Passman, D. (2011). All you need to know about the music business. New York: Rosetta Books.Google Scholar
  25. Phillips, R. J. (2013). Rock and roll fantasy? The reality of going from garage band to superstardom. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Rogan, J. (2011). Byrds: Requiem for the timeless (Vol. 1). London: Rogan House.Google Scholar
  27. Roth, A. E. (1988). The Shapley value: Essays in honor of Lloyd S. Shapley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Shapley, L. (1953). A value for n-person games. In H. W. Kuhn & A. W. Tucker (Eds.), Contributions to the theory of games (Vol. II). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Stigler, G. J. (1964). A theory of oligopoly. The Journal of Political Economy, 72(1), 44–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Strachan, I. (2010). The creative destruction of the winner-take-all society? Property rights and the economics of the long tail in the music industry. Ph.D. thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins.Google Scholar
  31. Strobl, E. A., & Tucker, C. (2000). The dynamics of chart success in the UK pre-recorded popular music industry. Journal of Cultural Economics, 24(2), 113–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Thomas, R. (2011) Precarious collaborations: A study of interpersonal conflict and resolution strategies in local rock bands. Thesis, Anthropology Department, University of Nebraska. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014&context=anthrotheses. (Accessed July 15, 2014).
  33. Thorpe, V. E. (2008). We made this song. The group song writing processes of three adolescent rock bands. Unpublished masters thesis, New Zealand School of Music, Wellington.Google Scholar
  34. Trust, G. (2013). Weekly chart notes: 10 group lead singers who could score solo success. Billboard. http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/1556584/weekly-chart-notes-10-group-lead-singers-who-could-score-solo. (Accessed Aug 21, 2014).
  35. Walker, J. L. (2008). This business of urban music. New York: Billboard Books.Google Scholar
  36. Westerlund, H. (2006). Garage rock bands: A future model for developing musical expertise? International Journal of Music Education, 24(2), 119–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Whitburn, J. (2011). Top pop singles, 1955–2010 (13th ed.). Menomonee Falls, WI: Record Research.Google Scholar
  38. Whitburn, J. (2012). Pop annual, 1955–2011 (8th ed.). Menomonee Falls, WI: Record Research.Google Scholar
  39. Whitburn, J. (2013). Top pop singles, 1955–2012 (14th ed.). Menomonee Falls, WI: Record Research.Google Scholar
  40. Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Colorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA
  2. 2.West Texas A&M UniversityCanyonUSA

Personalised recommendations