Will museums have enough money to stay open?

This article has been in the works for some time since my first piece on this very fascinating topic in September 2020. For that article, I had chosen one question as the title. I am again choosing one question as the title, however, this time I choose to answer it...with more questions! Do museums want to remain open and accessible in the previous ways in case they have the resources to do so? But, again, are museums seeking resilience to weather the storm and come out as unscathed as possible, or to reinvent themselves? But then what do museums mean when they aspire to permanently reopen and return to their audiences?

What is the situation right now? Experimenting, much more than before.

A recent article in The Art Newspaper quotes Chris Michaels (director of Digital, Communications and Technology at the National Gallery in London) who rightly points out that “money cannot be a priority [for digital engagement] simply because there is no target market,” but “the most important thing is to learn,” and if we do that “we will find the format, the price, the modes of operation more quickly.”

Michaels highlights a paradox. Surely museums must and need to experiment with the right formulas of digital engagement. And that takes time. But museums may not have time to experiment, or at least certainly not as much as they would like. And then this comment refers exclusively to digital. What about in-person engagement?

Different situations ranging from physical to online presence can be experimented with, but much of what is tried and tested comes from the concept of the museum as we have known it over the past years and decades (if not centuries). We have come to conceive of the museum as a boxed experience that has to do primarily with the objects and material culture that is presented to us in this boxed space, an experience that takes place in a defined space encompassed within the walls of the buildings in which these contents are stored. Access to this defined space is regulated by a mechanical time, and by a very narrow interval of time to devote to this experience. Museums operate according to time tables, which are clearly defined by parameters of time and space. They curate public-facing programs, exhibitions and experiences defined in time and space. Space and time govern the idea of a museum from the perspective of enjoyment and accessibility.

What the vast majority of museums have done so far, and particularly during the setbacks and hiccups caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, has been to carve out digital windows through which to access the experience or, in some cases, enlarge it. The experimentation Michaels refers to concerns these cutouts, operated within the historical fabric of the museum as a boxed experience. Still more questions arise at this point. What kind of windows do we need? Of what shapes and sizes? And further, are these digital windows the solution? The fact is that digital consumption does not take place within rigid time parameters. Nor does it depend on the opening or closing times of the boxed museum experience. On the contrary, the possibilities for engagement across time on the digital have no end and, dare I add, no expiration date.

All this brings me to the crux of the matter. One of the most valuable assets the museum has, the asset that could be the right resource to economically manage both present and future, may be the one that they paradoxically attribute the least value to and that is conceived almost exclusively because of the “canned experience” version of the museum idea: time...experience!

Photo by NeONBRAND on Unsplash

What models of economic sustainability might museums explore according to this way of thinking? Let’s look beyond museum ecology.

The economic sustainability of museums was recently the focus of an article by Lindsey Green for Frankly Green + Webb. In her arguments, Lindsey gives the example of three models that museums have traditionally followed. One of these, described as “cross-subsidy,” impacts the digital potential to directly generate revenue: “Using core funding and revenue generated from physical experiences to deliver online content means that online content is often dominated by the need to promote or mimic the onsite experience. It reinforces the idea that online is something less, rather than something different. While other industries see online as a tool to provide new products and new services designed specifically for online, museums have maintained the idea that online works in the service of the onsite experience.”

Creating online content that is economically sustainable is certainly the coveted goal, but the long-term goal should, if anything, be to explore how this fits into the larger picture of sustainability models for museums in all types of experience.

The two funding models I propose start by looking for analogies that do not correspond to the idea of a museum as we know it: that is, they do not respond to the idea of a boxed experience with specially cut-out digital windows. Rather, they are modeled after an idea of the museum of the future, which is liquid and hybrid. This idea of a museum could take the form of a multiplicity of packaged packages or experiences, in response to an anthropocentric museum idea, similar to a solar system of planets, moons, and asteroids.

Economic model A. Low-cost travel.

The low-cost travel analogy was the subject of an article I wrote for museumnext a few months ago, specifically thinking about the future of traveling exhibitions. The business model of low-cost travel is, in short, an amalgam of low prices, frequent point-to-point routes, online ticketing systems, optimized use of aircraft models, use of secondary airports, and highly productive workers. It is not the business model in its entirety that can suggest analogies to potential practices to be defined for the museum of the future, perhaps even the museum of the present. But some elements do, and in particular low prices and better time management. Criteria that museums might develop might relate to rethinking time through the lens of the customer’s expectations and desire to visit the museum.

Both the questions and the queries are many. Can we rethink the idea of a museum as an experience structured on multiple levels, with the easiest and most basic one accessible for free and with subsequent levels accessible online, in-person or both online and in-person, for a fee? Can museums sell experiences that begin online and continue in presence or vice versa, with one depending on the other in an interconnected way?

Economic Model B. The supermarket

The low-cost travel model can also be compared to the way supermarkets work, but with much more potentially predictive content to explore. Predictive content is a marketing and production technique that combines the flexibility and customization of products with the low costs associated with mass production.

The comparison between museums and supermarkets is not new. It dates back to 1982, when it was mentioned as an analogy for understanding museum audiences by John Falk, director of the Institute for Learning Innovation and Sea Grant Professor of Free-Choice Learning at Oregon Statr University. Falk spoke of “serious buyers” describing those who know exactly what they want and of “window shoppers” to refer to those who come in just to take a look and never seem to want to buy anything. “A museum,” Falk wrote, “is like a department store, and museum visitors are like buyers. In a store, the customer’s disposable income largely determines his or her behavior, whereas in the museum it is time that plays a primary role.”

The shopping experience is determined by time, regardless of what one decides to buy, and the money one has available to buy. This happens both in-person and online.

Even more questions and queries. Can museums rethink themselves as resources similar to cultural products that can be placed on virtual shelves and made available to buyers according to their quality and type? Can these products be consumed in the future, partially consumed in the present, created in series, with regular releases or developments of the experience available for purchase along a defined period of time ranging from the immediate future to the distant future?

Photo by Nikki Normandeau on Unsplash

Starting with the low-cost experience and the supermarket experience, I propose three possibilities for the enjoyment of museum time. They are three tastings, to be understood more than ever as reflections of possible experiences.

Experience A. "I visit the main museum building. I don’t need an entrance fee to visit it, and I can stay as long as I want. I have plenty of time to spend. I choose five specific pre-packaged experiences in digital format and pay only for those. One is a simple five-minute introduction to the museum. The other four are longer and one of them is a meditation session, slow looking inspiration. Another pre-packaged experience is offered at a reduced price. I also choose this one because it is shorter. I end up spending the whole day at the museum paying only for what is of specific interest to me."

Experience B. “I choose the pre-packaged experience online, with a targeted and specific choice. I also use the high-resolution photos to see in as much detail as possible. Subsequently, I decide to visit the physical space of the museum and am comfortable wandering around the halls because of the prior online experience. At one point I choose a prepackaged presentation on art techniques in digital format, which is quite challenging to follow. The fact that I had already gone through the highlights in the prepackaged online experience makes it more interesting and understandable. Time is running out and I only have 15 minutes also because at the museum you pay as much as you stay with a full visitor’s ticket that starts from spending an hour and a half onwards. I decide on another prepackaged experience: an introduction to the main gallery. I decide to return to the museum in the future. In the meantime I will return to the online experience more frequently and download pre-packaged experiences from the website. Again, I only pay for what I choose to consume.”

Experience C. “I decide to visit the museum but I only have 30 minutes. I choose a prepackaged experience that includes meditative music chosen based on my favorite paintings. I decide to return but in the meantime I will have used the online experience to select and choose the works I would like to see and to download the pre-packaged content in advance. In the meantime I will have used the online play experience i.e. the museum’s video game which is free and gives me the chance to get rewards including a discount for a designer product to pick up at the bookshop when I return.”

The innovation the museum seeks may lie in the suburbs. The museum’s self-referential identity, which in a way is also historical, often stifles the innovation to which the museum aspires. If we start with the museum as we have always understood and recognized it, we are limited in recognizing the varied possibilities for rethinking it in a more usable, accessible and resilient format. It is not about distorting the idea of the museum. It is about the varied possibilities for the fruition of the boxed experience that goes beyond digital window cutouts or enlargements. And the historical fabric of the Mediterranean museum as a boxed experience can give rise to a system of museum usability that goes beyond space and time.

Warning: the translation into English of the original Italian article was created using automatic tools. We undertake to review all articles, but we do not guarantee the total absence of inaccuracies in the translation due to the program. You can find the original by clicking on the ITA button. If you find any mistake,please contact us.