Does business sense compromise core values?
Janita Bagshawe, Issue 111/07, p17, 01.07.2011
Can we use our creativity in public programming for commercial benefit?
To survive the current economic crisis, will taking a tough commercial view of museums and their assets give rise to greater innovation and creativity, and result in sustainable economic and business models and outcomes, or will it lead to a serious compromise of core values?
On a financial balance sheet, collections and buildings appear as assets with a value. The hard-nosed business person would expect to see those assets providing a good financial return or at least a proven social return.
But the concept of considering the social return from assets is not embedded fully in the sector and the notion of financial return, with some notable exceptions, is largely limited to what might be yielded from merchandising based on collections and hiring out space.
Most of us would probably admit that our assets cost more to store and look after than the value they return. Can we afford to ignore this fact in developing our future business models?
Museums should be taking imaginative approaches to audience engagement, exhibitions, interpretation and display that are risky, subversive and mould-breaking to ensure that they get a far better return from their assets. The potential outcome is greater audience reach and financial sustainability through innovative ways of doing business.
What we shouldn’t do is stick to the tried and tested ways just to avoid visitor disaffection. We need to look at issues such as whether it has been right to replace artefacts with popular interactives in an attempt to attract audiences while consigning our assets to the store cupboard and turning them into liabilities on the balance sheet.
As commercial income has traditionally come from catering, retail and premises use, where organisations have not already developed these income streams, realising assets could mean replacing a gallery with a tea room or galleries closing for a day-time hire. How will visitors judge this?
Conventional income streams alone are not going to overcome the financial crisis. Consideration will need to be given to charging for what has traditionally been free. More radically it could lead to lending to companies and even individuals or innovative shared services.
We have to ask if we can use our creativity in public programming with collections for commercial benefit, what untapped potential the collections hold and if we are prepared to think differently about how we work our assets for commercial gain.
To ensure long-term survival just how far are we prepared to go? Will adopting a business view of our assets be liberating or will it prove to have been a step too far?
Janita Bagshawe is the head of museums and director of the Royal Pavilion at Brighton & Hove City Council.
She is coordinating the Innovation, Creativity and Crisis theme at the MA conference: www.museumsassociation/conference
On a financial balance sheet, collections and buildings appear as assets with a value. The hard-nosed business person would expect to see those assets providing a good financial return or at least a proven social return.
But the concept of considering the social return from assets is not embedded fully in the sector and the notion of financial return, with some notable exceptions, is largely limited to what might be yielded from merchandising based on collections and hiring out space.
Most of us would probably admit that our assets cost more to store and look after than the value they return. Can we afford to ignore this fact in developing our future business models?
Museums should be taking imaginative approaches to audience engagement, exhibitions, interpretation and display that are risky, subversive and mould-breaking to ensure that they get a far better return from their assets. The potential outcome is greater audience reach and financial sustainability through innovative ways of doing business.
What we shouldn’t do is stick to the tried and tested ways just to avoid visitor disaffection. We need to look at issues such as whether it has been right to replace artefacts with popular interactives in an attempt to attract audiences while consigning our assets to the store cupboard and turning them into liabilities on the balance sheet.
As commercial income has traditionally come from catering, retail and premises use, where organisations have not already developed these income streams, realising assets could mean replacing a gallery with a tea room or galleries closing for a day-time hire. How will visitors judge this?
Conventional income streams alone are not going to overcome the financial crisis. Consideration will need to be given to charging for what has traditionally been free. More radically it could lead to lending to companies and even individuals or innovative shared services.
We have to ask if we can use our creativity in public programming with collections for commercial benefit, what untapped potential the collections hold and if we are prepared to think differently about how we work our assets for commercial gain.
To ensure long-term survival just how far are we prepared to go? Will adopting a business view of our assets be liberating or will it prove to have been a step too far?
Janita Bagshawe is the head of museums and director of the Royal Pavilion at Brighton & Hove City Council.
She is coordinating the Innovation, Creativity and Crisis theme at the MA conference: www.museumsassociation/conference
Poll
Should museums be run like businesses?
Add your comment