Analysis

Introduction

When I first approached KultOU about my Special Project, they explained that one of the biggest issues in the creative sector today is how emerging graphic literature creators, despite having strong creative talent, often struggle to turn that talent into a sustainable career. For indie creators especially, there are systemic barriers: limited access to mentorship, unclear pathways for professional growth, and a lack of practical tools for portfolio development, pitching, networking, and monetization.

I knew that before designing anything, I had to deeply understand these problems from the creators’ point of view. So, I decided to begin with a needs assessment. I created a Google Forms survey and shared it KultOU’s online communities.

The goal was simple: to collect authentic data on what emerging creators actually experience, their skill levels, what they struggle with, and what they dream of achieving.

I wanted to base the toolkit on real voices and real struggles so that it would truly meet their needs.

Demographics

Seventeen people answered the survey. Most were female (58.82%, she/her), with they/them at 23.53% and he/him at 17.65%. Fifteen of the respondents (88.24%) were studying the Bachelor of Arts in Multimedia Studies, one was in the Associate of Arts in Digital Design and Arts, and another in Bachelor of Education Studies.

Looking at their years in school, 47.06% were second-year students, 23.53% were in their third year, 17.65% in their fourth year, and 11.76% were first-year students. This means most respondents are still early in their academic and creative journey, still figuring out their professional identities. This insight was critical because it shaped my approach: the toolkit needed to be a foundation, not an advanced manual, built to guide creators through their early stages of career development.

Professional Interests and Skill Gaps

The survey results were revealing. Creators were clearly passionate about their craft. 94.12% wanted to deepen skills in illustration and marketing or promotion, and 76.47% showed interest in writing/storytelling and self-publishing. But when asked about their professional skills, there was a gap. For portfolio building, 52.94% rated their knowledge as basic and 47.06% as minimal. Nobody said they had advanced knowledge.

Pitching experience was also low: 11.76% had pitched their work multiple times, 5.89% had pitched once, 35.29% planned to pitch but had not, and 47.06% did not know where to start. This gap between creative enthusiasm and professional preparedness showed clearly that they needed structured training in these areas.

Portfolio Development and Self-Publishing Challenges

The challenges became clearer when I asked more specific questions.

In portfolio development, 82.35% said selecting their best work and understanding industry expectations was difficult. 76.47% pointed out a lack of feedback or guidance, and 64.70% were unsure what to include. Only 5.89% said they struggled with choosing a website platform.

Self-publishing was another hurdle. 58.82% had minimal knowledge, 29.41% basic knowledge, and 11.76% advanced knowledge. Everyone (100%) said marketing and audience building were barriers. Financial constraints were also high at 82.35%, followed by lack of knowledge about platforms at 64.70%, and fear of failure at 58.82%. This painted a clear picture: creators need not just creative tools, but strategic guidance in marketing, funding, and audience building.

Networking and Mentorship

Confidence in networking was low. 58.82% said they had minimal confidence, 29.41% basic, and only 11.76% advanced. Most sought mentorship online (94.12%), with fewer turning to workshops or conventions (58.82%). Only 17.65% looked to professors or professionals for guidance, and another 17.65% had no access to mentorship at all. This told me that mentorship and structured networking opportunities had to be central to the toolkit. 

Learning Preferences and Career Goals

Everyone wanted to grow professionally. 100% wanted to learn about networking and industry insights, 88.24% wanted to build their portfolio and pitching skills, 82.35% were interested in monetization and financial sustainability, and 70.59% in self-publishing and crowdfunding.

In terms of career goals: 82.35% wanted to work in industries like animation and gaming, 52.94% wanted to become self-published creators, 35.29% wanted to teach or mentor, and 29.41% wanted to work with traditional publishers.

When asked how they prefer to learn, 64.71% favored interactive workshops, 17.65% preferred lecture-style presentations with Q&A, and another 17.65% wanted self-paced online modules. This told me that the toolkit should be interactive and practical, designed for creators who want hands-on learning experiences.

Case Studies for Contextual Understanding

The results of the needs analysis aligned strongly with broader research on the creative industry in the Philippines, which further reinforced my sense that the toolkit should address both skill gaps and systemic challenges.

One highly relevant reference is the study by de Guzman (2020), A Profiling Study of the Creative Industry Artists of Baguio City, the First Creative City in the Philippines. This research examined the lived experiences of 56 creative practitioners in Baguio City. It showed that many artists faced difficulty marketing their work, lacked financial stability, and had limited access to institutional support and career guidance. These findings mirror my own data, where portfolio development and marketing emerged as major concerns for respondents. What stood out in de Guzman’s work was how these challenges were not simply individual skill gaps, but part of larger structural realities of the Philippine creative economy. This affirmed for me that the toolkit should include both practical skills and strategies to navigate broader industry challenges.

The work of Sagun and Luyt (2018) in The Industry Avengers: An Analysis of Contemporary Comic Book Publishers in the Philippines provided another layer of insight. They explored how independent comic publishers face systemic issues such as distribution limitations, lack of formal industry networks, and minimal mainstream support. The study highlighted how these creators adapt by forming informal communities for mutual support. This was significant for me because my survey data revealed similar realities — low confidence in pitching and networking, and heavy reliance on informal online communities. This suggests that the challenge is not simply a lack of skill but the absence of accessible and structured opportunities for creators to connect, collaborate, and gain mentorship. For my project, this meant that fostering networking opportunities and building confidence in pitching would be core components of the toolkit.

A third case study comes from the Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS, 2023) — Issues Faced by Creative and Multimedia Online Workers in the Philippines. This national policy research examined the conditions of freelance and creative workers. It highlighted key systemic barriers: unstable income, lack of benefits, and challenges in sustaining a career over time. These findings directly resonate with the barriers my respondents identified, such as financial constraints, lack of platform knowledge, and fear of failure. The alignment between the PIDS report and my own survey further emphasizes that these challenges are widespread and structural rather than isolated incidents. This reinforced the importance of including a strong focus on income diversification, crowdfunding, and sustainable career strategies in the toolkit.

It was important for me to situate the toolkit within this broader context so that it does not just provide technical solutions but also speaks to the lived realities and structural conditions of emerging creators.

Theoretical Frameworks for Analysis

The needs assessment was about understanding how emerging creators learn, how they make meaning from their practice, and how they situate themselves within the creative economy. To frame this analysis, I drew on three complementary learning theories that reflect my educational philosophy and that I believe best address the instructional problem.

Constructivist Learning Theory was central to my approach. This theory asserts that learners actively construct knowledge through experience, reflection, and interaction with their environment. For emerging graphic literature creators, this means that skill acquisition happens most effectively when it is grounded in authentic creative projects and personal reflection. This aligns with the expressed needs of my respondents, who wanted practical, activity-based learning rather than abstract instruction. Constructivism also values the learner’s own lived experiences as part of the learning process. This perspective shaped the needs analysis itself and the way I interpreted the data. The survey was designed to elicit creators’ perspectives so that the toolkit could be built from their own realities.

Knowles’ Theory of Andragogy offers another important lens. It emphasizes that adult learners are motivated when learning is problem-centered, self-directed, and relevant to their personal and professional lives. My findings confirmed this, as respondents clearly valued learning formats that offered practical solutions to immediate challenges. For instance, many expressed a strong preference for interactive workshops over passive lectures. This insight influenced the instructional design, leading to the decision that the toolkit should be practical, hands-on, and adaptable to individual creators’ circumstances. Andragogy also stresses the importance of drawing on the learner’s prior experience, which is particularly relevant to this project because the learners are already practicing creators who bring unique skills and challenges to the table.

Humanistic Learning Theory adds another layer by focusing on learner autonomy, self-actualization, and personal growth. This theory resonated deeply with my own educational philosophy and with the needs assessment findings. Respondents expressed a desire for mentorship and confidence-building, which reflects the humanistic emphasis on agency and empowerment. For me, this meant designing the toolkit not as a rigid set of steps but as a flexible resource that creators can adapt to their own goals. It also reinforced the importance of integrating reflective activities into the toolkit so that creators could align their artistic values with their professional choices.

Together, these theories helped me to articulate a deeper understanding of the instructional problem. They ensured that the toolkit would not simply address the skill gaps identified in the needs analysis but would also be grounded in a learner-centered approach that respects the individuality, agency, and lived experience of the participants.

Multi-Perspective Evaluation of the Needs 

From my perspective, the needs analysis confirmed that emerging creators need structured, empowering guidance that considers their lived realities.

From the organization’s perspective, the needs analysis provided concrete evidence to justify commissioning the toolkit. It validated their awareness of the gaps in the creative industry and gave them a roadmap for meaningful intervention.

From the participants’ perspective, the survey process itself became an act of reflection. Many expressed appreciations for being asked about their needs and welcomed a program designed to address them.

Challenges in Conducting the Needs Analysis

Reflecting on this phase, I recognize that the needs analysis was not without its challenges. Time constraints were a significant factor. The needs assessment form had to close within one week to keep the project timeline on track, which meant there was limited opportunity for extended engagement or follow-up with respondents. This compressed timeframe inevitably affected the depth of responses and participation rates.

Another challenge was that some members of KultOU faced circumstances that prevented them from completing the survey within the given timeframe. These circumstances varied. Some had conflicting academic obligations, others had personal matters that demanded their attention, and a few were engaged in other organizational activities. This underscored for me that even when participants are interested, external factors can influence their ability to contribute fully, and that accessibility and flexibility must be considered when designing future needs assessments.

Despite these challenges, I am grateful that seventeen participants completed the survey, providing rich and valuable data. While the constraints limited the breadth of participation, the information gathered was sufficient to identify clear patterns and gaps that guided the next steps of the project. The challenges themselves became a learning point, reinforcing my commitment to designing processes that are as inclusive and adaptable as possible while still meeting project deadlines.

Needs Assessment Survey