Marketing for Cultural Organizations

New Strategies for Attracting Audiences - third edition

Bonita M. Kolb

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781136239526
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Commerce
• Subtopic: Marketing
• Index: Marketing

Marketing for Cultural Organizations presents traditional marketing theory with a focus on the aspects most relevant to arts or cultural organizations. The book explains how to overcome the division between the concepts of high art and popular culture by targeting the new tech savvy cultural consumer.

As arts patronage has declined, and given new technological advances, arts organizations have had to adapt to a new environment and compete for an audience. This edition emphasizes visitor or audience participation, as well as the use of social media in attracting and maintaining an audience. Learning to harness social media and technology in order to encourage a dialogue with its audience is of primary importance for arts organizations. This book covers:

- Cost effective methods of researching the audience using technology
- Developing a consistent, branded online message
- Using social media to increase audience engagement, and involve them in the creative process

With an approach that is jargon-free and focused on practical application, this book is designed for both undergraduate and graduate students of arts marketing and cultural management.

1 Cultural Marketing Challenges

Cultural organizations have been using marketing since the 1970s to inform potential customers of upcoming events. This was a very simplified use—marketing as promotion—but it was all that was needed at the time. Everyone understood that art was somehow better than popular forms of entertainment and, therefore, deserved support by attendance and donations. While marketing to consumers was used by cultural organizations, it was one way communication that merely provided factual information.

Technological and social changes have made this simplified form of marketing obsolete. Cultural organizations must now develop a new marketing strategy that allows for two-way communication to build a relationship with their customers. Creating a marketing plan will help guide the cultural organization as it meets these new marketing challenges.

The New Reality

In the last decade, there have been fundamental changes in communication technology that have altered more than just the way people communicate. Instant access to unlimited factual information and also an unlimited supply of the opinions of others have also changed the way people purchase and consume products. As a result, the relationship between the consumer and the cultural organization needs to be rethought. The cultural organization can no longer present the art product as a passive experience where artists communicate their vision to an uninvolved audience, but must develop a means through which the audience is able to communicate ideas and even to engage in the creative process.

This change in perspective by the cultural organization is necessary because there has been a fundamental change in the public’s attitude toward culture and art. There has been a growing disregard for the historical distinction between types of cultural products that started with the rise of commercial popular culture (DiMaggio 2000). As a result, how people view the distinction between high art and popular cultural has radically altered the relationship between the organization and the audience. Now, much of the public no longer believes in a cultural hierarchy where high art has an intrinsic worth that popular culture does not have (Johnson 2006). Instead, the public considers themselves to be the equal of artists. Because of technological and social changes the only hierarchy that remains is between culture that the consumer does or does not enjoy.

Technological Changes

Technology has resulted in the establishment of new forms of community that were not imaginable in the past. Because of the ease of communication with words and images over distances, today a cyber-community is just as “real” and, therefore, as valid as a physical community. People have always shared their opinions on organizations and products except that the opinions in online communities spread more rapidly and widely (Dreyer and Grant 2010). This has created the need for cultural organizations to develop specific marketing messages that communicates to these communities.

The organization needs to do more than just communicate; it also needs to develop a means for these communities to be actively involved with the organization. Art used to be something that was done by artists and then delivered to the audience. Technology today allows everyone to create. While the audience may still acknowledge that the artist has a higher level of skill or a more interesting message, this is a degree of difference rather than an absolute difference. Because of the ability to create using technology, passively viewing the artistic creations produced by cultural organizations is of little interest (Simon 2010). Therefore, the organization now needs to use technology to allow their audience to be part of the creative

Using Your Phone to Connect Crosses Age and Ethnic Boundaries

Who has a smartphone? In the US the ownership of smartphones has grown from 35 percent of adults in 2011 to 46 percent of adults in 2012. (Another 41% have basic cell phones.) What do they do with their phones that might be of interest to cultural organizations? Seventy-four percent get location-based information, such as what is nearby and what nearby is recommended. Eighteen percent of smartphone users use their phone to access geosocial services (Foursquare, Gowalla, or others). What is most interesting is the identity of the users. It may not be surprising that 23 percent of smartphone users aged 18–29 use the services. But adults aged 30–49 at 17 percent and adults aged 50+ at 14 percent are not that far behind. African Americans (21%) and Hispanics (23%) use the services more than white, non-Hispanic smartphone owners (17%). So, cultural organizations should consider making sure that when these groups are accessing the geosocial sites they will be finding them.

Pew Research Center (2012)

process. To do so the organization must create its own cyber-community focused on the particular art form. This should not be difficult as the arts have always formed a community of likeminded people.

Social Changes

The social changes that have resulted from technological changes have also been profound. The blurring of the distinction between high art and popular culture has been going on for some time. With the advent of social networking it can be said that this blurring is now complete. Consumers of culture now only make distinctions between types of culture, which they no longer view as hierarchical. Cultural organizations that were the traditional gatekeepers and informed the public of what was good art versus bad have been replaced by anonymous bloggers who share their opinions whether informed or uninformed (Keen 2007).

The traditional hierarchy of the distinction between “high” art and “popular” culture was disappearing by the end of the twentieth century because more people, unconcerned with value judgments regarding the relative worth of each, consumed both (Staniszewski 1995). The view of today’s consumer of culture is that life is enriched by more and varied experiences of any type, which they want to share with others. They believe that the social act of sharing an experience with an online community is as of much importance as the experience itself. In fact, many consumers do not see the difference, as social sharing is part of any experience.

This social sharing can take three forms (Hollman and Young 2012). People want to share their excitement or disappointment about products with other current or potential users. People also want to share with the organization their ideas on how products can be improved. Finally, they want to help other users with problems or questions about the product. Cultural organizations must develop a means for this sharing to take place.

Cultural Organizations

This book uses the term cultural organization instead of art institution for a reason. Cultural organizations should think of themselves as members of their communities. They should view their art as something they wish to share, rather than impose from above. For this reason instead of the word art, the word culture is used as it applies in a broad sense to all events or objects created by a society to communicate cultural values. Instead of the word institution, the word organization is used. An institution is a place, but organizations are groups of people. Although the people who make up the organization may work in a building, it should not confine or define them. In fact an organization may not have their own space, but instead work out of another public or private institution, or have no physical location at all and work out of cyberspace.

While the management and purpose of cultural organizations tends to vary to some extent in different countries, there is still an immediately recognizable similarity across national borders as to purpose of the product and the intended audience (Hudson 1987). The ambience of a museum may vary from the United States to Japan, but there is no confusion as to the fact that both are museums. The same can be said of theatre, classical music, opera, and dance. Likewise, the technological and cultural changes are happening on a global scale. For this reason, the marketing information in this book can be applied across national boundaries.

Development of Cultural Organizations

If the urge to communicate and create is innate to the human spirit, then there have always been artists. However, the freedom for an individual to create unencumbered by the need to sell the work to provide for everyday existence is a modern development. Through most of history, the necessity to provide the basics of survival was paramount, and the art that was created needed to have some social purpose to justify its existence. There were simply no resources or energy to spare for art for art’s sake.

When society organized itself into the ruled and the rulers, the rulers then had the money and time to have artistic objects created just for them. Many of these objects had spiritual significance and were used for religious purposes. For much of history, only royalty and the church had the wealth to patronize the arts. During the Middle Ages, artists created objects of worship for the church and objects of pleasure for royal houses. Besides being of use, the art for both groups was also a symbol of status.

As the wealth of society developed in Europe during the Renaissance, the patronage of the arts began to expand and the great merchant families had the wealth to join royalty and the church in playing a critical role in supporting individual artists. The newly wealthy merchants began to patronize artists (Sweetman 1998). The art performance or object was purchased to fill the increasing leisure time or as possessions to adorn the home. These merchants were not individually wealthy enough to support an artist, but, through many of them purchasing art, artists were now able to survive. Patronage by a royal individual, church, or merchants provided the artist with economic support. In exchange, it was considered the artist’s duty to provide art that appealed to the taste of the patron. The artist’s individual artistic vision was considered of secondary importance, if it was considered at all.

The Industrial Revolution in Europe resulted in growth in the wealth and power of towns and cities, and civil governments started to take on the burden of supporting the artist, which was formerly the responsibility of the court, church, and merchant family. In fact, cities often competed with each other to obtain the services of the most famous artist in a manner similar to the way modern cities court sports teams. Rather than be seen merely as a craftsman whose skill was used as a means to glorify others, European society began to treat artists as a special category of people entitled to create art based on their own personal vision.

Rather than support the artist directly, the city and wealthy business people now funded the organization sponsoring the artist or presenting the art form. Instead of artists being supported by religious or royal patrons, or being dependent upon the whims of merchants, the idea of a professionally managed institution that supports the artist was invented (Björkegren 1996).

These cultural organizations have supplanted the patrons of the past. Cultural organizations have a unique role in the marketplace because they provide goods/services that for profit firms cannot, or will not, provide. Since cultural organizations could count on subsidies, they often did not even attempt to cover costs with revenue.

The modern arrangement is for the cultural organization to be supported by public funding and staffed by people who are not artists, but closely believe in the vision of the artist. It is often the managers of these organizations who act as gatekeepers by determining the value of culture. Since only work of value will be presented, then the fact that work is presented by a cultural organization gives value to the work (Bourdieu 1993).

Now the role of the organization itself is being called into question because people using technology can view, create, and share art and culture on their own. The organization’s traditional role to educate, advocate, and share art and culture still remains. However the educating, advocating, and sharing will also be done between members of the public without the influence of the organization. Cultural organizations will no longer be leading; they will just be joining the conversation. However, through this joint conversation with the public, the organization can better communicate its message and meet its mission (Notter and Grant 2011).

Where Pianos Go to Die

Not just artists and arts organizations, but even musical instruments, are struggling to survive. The golden age of pianos refers to the millions of pianos that were produced in the US starting at the beginning of the twentieth century. While 365,000 were sold in 1910, only 41,000 were sold in 2011. It isn’t just that new pianos are not being sold; no one wants the old ones, which are now routinely dumped in landfills because they can’t even be given away. Why? Pianos are no longer the focus of home entertainment. In addition, people are not taking piano lessons, there are cuts in music education programs in schools, and the depressed housing market means that people are not buying pianos for new homes. When a YouTube video was posted of pianos being dumped at the landfill, people were outraged. A piano adoption website was created but to no avail, as no one was willing to adopt.

Wakin (2012)

Current Challenges

According to a Rand Corporation study, the strict separation of nonprofit organizations creating high culture and for profit businesses creating popular culture passed with the end of the last century (McCarthy et al. 2001). Today, it is difficult to even know from outside the organization whether it is a nonprofit cultural organization or a for profit creative business.

The Rand report predicted a future of cultural production where for profit and nonprofit organizations would compete in providing cultural products. The difference would be that for profits would aim for a mass audience while the nonprofit would target a specific audience interested in a high quality cultural experience. On the other side of the size spectrum, small for profit firms would target niche audiences for cultural products, while small nonprofit organizations would focus on local a...