I ACCEPT the point of Simon Warr, chairman of the UK's Lap Dancing Association, when he says - as reported in yesterday's edition - "our premises are not sexually stimulating," writes Frank McNally.
If anything, this is an understatement. I pass such premises regularly, in Dublin and elsewhere; and frankly, not even an architect with drink on him could get excited by their dour brick facades. I imagine (while protesting my ignorance on the matter) that the interiors are not much better.
But along with the House of Commons culture committee, which he was addressing at the time, I am stunned by Mr Warr's claim that the activity for which the clubs are best known is not sexually stimulating either. Or that if it were, it would be "contrary to our business plan".
Appearing alongside Peter Stringfellow, and arguing against a change in licensing laws that currently treat lap-dancing establishments the same as pubs and other places of entertainment, Mr Warr went on to lament popular misconceptions about his sector: "One of the biggest problems we face is that not enough people understand the business blueprint of our clubs," he said.
This is clearly the case. So in an effort to increase my own understanding of the issue, never mind the public's, I decided to find out what exactly is contained in the typical lap-dancing club's "business plan".
To this end I conducted a telephone interview yesterday with a leading industry figure, who took time out from a meeting of high-powered lap-dancing executives to discuss his blueprint with me (on condition of anonymity). Naturally, I had already armed myself with an up-to-date glossary of business terms, in the hope that I could avoid appearing stupid.
I first asked him what his clubs' "core competencies" involved. Or, if he preferred, what were the "key deliverables"? After complimenting me on a "very good question", he explained that, essentially, his "service providers" were dedicated to offering "client-focused solutions" in a "competitive marketplace", and that they aimed, by avoiding "sub-optimal performance", to maximise "customer feedback", with a view to "changing mindsets" and, if possible, achieve a "paradigm shift", "going forward".
Pretending to understand any of this, I wondered if the work involved a certain amount of marketplace "exposure"; whether this be - and here I checked my glossary nervously - of the "fundamentals"; or occasionally, even, of the "bottom line"? My interviewee would reply only that his staff were deployed in a "highly competitive environment" in which "maximising skill-sets" was essential if they were to generate revenue, again "going forward".
I took that as a "yes".
I asked him if the work was always confined to "going forward", or if it also occasionally involved "going backwards", "sideways", and "generally writhing about in a suggestive manner". While objecting to my use of language, he agreed that, yes, "flexibility" was essential to success in the modern marketplace. But the important thing, he added, was that solutions should be always offered on a "multi-platform" basis.
"Are platforms back in?" I blurted, momentarily forgetting my glossary. "I though it was all stiletto heels?" The executive gave me a withering look down the phone and said my attitude was sadly typical of the misunderstanding that bedevilled lap-dancing's business plans at every turn.
So, anxious to regain his trust, I changed the subject to infrastructure, with particular reference to the "poles" that performers reportedly use in their work. Were these necessary for "asset-leveraging", I asked. Or was it just that, whenever staff members had a new business idea, they could "run it up the pole and see if anybody salutes"? My interviewee relaxed again and confirmed that, while not essential, the poles played an important role in many dance clubs, as the axis around which the "core competencies revolved". Unfortunately, when I asked if his management role involved a lot of "sweating the assets", I sensed his renewed suspicion of my attitude. So once more, I thought it better to change the subject.
I put it to him that, reputedly, a customer in a lap-dancing club could also pay to have the key deliverables performed at his table, on a one-to-one basis. But I was a little puzzled as to what exactly the service provider was "bringing to the table" in such a case.
The executive said be would prefer not to discuss the "granularity" of the business, except to say that "interfacing" with the "client base" was important.
By now, I was down to the letter "T" in my management speak glossary. So, without understanding what exactly it meant, I asked if we were facing a possible "tipping point" in lap-dancing. My interviewee commented that, in his view, gratuities would always be a discretionary matter. The club's main concern was that the drinks were paid for.
Finally, I inquired of the executive if he could e-mail me an actual copy of his business blueprint.
Unsure about this, he said he would have to "touch base" with his accounts people first. Which reminded me yet of another question. Was it true that if a customer touched base - or any other part of the service provider - he would be thrown out into the street?
The executive just hung up on me at this point.
fmcnally@irish-times.ie
