Kerameikos Heritage Shop

Home , Athens War Museum, Deste Foundation, Epigraphical Museum, Frissiras Museum, Goudi, Gounaropoulos Museum

Kerameikos Heritage shop:

The beginning of a new era?

The concept of heritage shops in Greece with a case study of Kerameikos archaeological site

Elizabeth Laura Jean Kearsey Evangelia Koureta Glenn Maxwell Martin Anastasia Pouliou

HM899: Dissertation Field Study Project Heritage Management MA 2015

Kerameikos Heritage Shop: The Beginning of a new era?

Elizabeth Laura Jean Kearsey, Evangelia Koureta, Glenn Maxwell Martin, Anastasia Pouliou

HM899- Dissertation/Field Study Project 2015

University of Kent/Athens University of Business and Economics

Word count: 15,967

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements...... 7 Chapter one- Introduction ...... 8 Chapter two- Literature Review ...... 10 Introduction ...... 10 The History and Development of Museum Shops ...... 10 Heritage Shop Definition ...... 12 Distinguishing Features of a Heritage Shop ...... 13 The Heritage Shop Environment ...... 13 Benefits of a Heritage Shop ...... 14 Extending Experience and Enhancing Value ...... 15 Marketing the Museum Shop ...... 16 Fears and Criticisms Regarding the Commercialisation of Heritage ...... 17 Chapter three- Current Analysis...... 18 Chapter Four- Greek Legal Framework ...... 22 Legislative framework of the Archaeological Receipts Fund ...... 22 Chapter Five - Heritage shops in Greece Questionnaire summary ...... 31 Chapter six- S.W.O.T analysis ...... 36 Chapter Seven- Methodology ...... 39 Step by step guide...... 41 Kerameikos Case Study ...... 43 Chapter eight - Vision and Mission ...... 43 Vision ...... 43 Time Plan (One year) ...... 44 Mission- Explore, Educate and Engage ...... 45 Chapter nine- Benchmarking ...... 46 Analysis ...... 50 Chapter ten - Data and Statistics...... 51 Projections ...... 55 Chapter eleven - Stakeholders ...... 56 Chapter twelve- PESTLE Analysis ...... 60 Chapter thirteen- Interview Summaries ...... 62 Managers of European village- European Village, Kerameikos ...... 62

Nicholas Kontoprias, Director of Herakleidon Museum, Thissio ...... 62 Aspasia Louvi – Head of TAP - TAP central office, Panepistimou...... 62 Konstantinos – Shop staff and jeweller at the Folk Art Museum Shop- Monastiraki...... 63 Acropolis Museum ...... 63 Summary of Ethnographic Analysis of tourists ...... 64 Summary of Greek questionnaires ...... 64 Chapter Fourteen- Kerameikos Heritage shop questionnaire summary ...... 66 Chapter fifteen - Porters Five Forces ...... 69 Chapter sixteen- Kerameikos SWOT Analysis ...... 71 Chapter seventeen -Marketing Mix ...... 73 Chapter eighteen- Concluding Recommendations ...... 78 Bibliography ...... 80 Appendix ...... 91 Appendix 1- Laws...... 91 Appendix 2 Law 3028/2002, Chapter 6, Article 46, paragraph 4 ...... 94 Appendix 3 Human Resources Proposal ...... 94 Appendix 4 - The statues of establishments of associations...... 95 Appendix 5 Brief History of Kerameikos ...... 96 Appendix 6 -Kerameikos SOUV Statement of Outstanding Universal Value ...... 99 Appendix 7 - Interview Transcripts ...... 102 Interview with Nicholas Kontoprias, Director of Herakleidon Museum ...... 102 Interview with Konstantinos – Shop staff and jewellery maker...... 104 Interview with Aspasia Louvi – Head of TAP ...... 105 Interview with the managers of European village ...... 112 Interview with Acropolis Museum ...... 115 Appendix 8 -Ethnographic analysis ...... 118 Tourists ...... 118 Greek Interviews ...... 125 14 filled Greek questionnaires ...... 131 Appendix 9 Evaluation museum store performance ...... 136 Appendix 10 Shop Location Proposals...... 137 Values relating to the heritage shop...... 138 Visibility of a museum shop ...... 138 Shop size ...... 138 Relationship between shop and site ...... 139

Separating shop and site ...... 139 Location involving the community ...... 140 Location one: ...... 142 Location two: ...... 145 Location three: ...... 147 Location four: ...... 149 Appendix 11 Resources and Capabilities ...... 152 Appendix 12 Stakeholders Tables ...... 153 Appendix 12- Branding-and Logo ...... 157 Appendix 13- A product prototype ...... 163

Chart 1- Heritage shops which Questionnaire recipients have visited ...... 31 Chart 2- Best heritage shops in Greece according to questionnaire recipients ...... 32 Chart 3- Best heritage shops in the world according to questionnaire recipients ...... 33 Chart 4- Heritage shop products which questionnaire recipients would buy ...... 34 Chart 5- Step by step guide for establishing a heritage shop ...... 41 Chart 6- Time plan ...... 44 Chart 7- Values of Kerameikos Heritage shop ...... 45 Chart 8- Visitation figures to archaeological sites in Athens City Centre ...... 51 Chart 9- Revenues (€) from archaeological sites in Athens City Centre ...... 52 Chart 10 -Visitation figures of 2014 to archaeological sites in Athens City Centre ...... 52 Chart 11 Visitation figures and differences from 2014 of Kerameikos and Ancient Agora ..... 53 Chart 12- Visitation figures and differences from 2015 of Kerameikos and Ancient Agora .... 53 Chart 13 -Kerameikos Visitation levels 2013-2015 ...... 54 Chart 14 -Kerameikos Revenues ...... 54 Chart 15- Questionnaire recipients preferred locally sourced products...... 67 Chart 16- Questionnaire recipients’ reasons why they buy gifts from shops ...... 67 Chart 17- Questionnaire recipients in favour of an E-shop...... 68

Table 1- SWOT analysis of heritage shops in Greece ...... 38 Table 2 Benchmarking table ...... 46 Table 3- Revenues/projections for 2013-2015 ...... 55 Table 4- Estimated projections for 2016 ...... 55 Table 5- List of immediate stakeholders ...... 56

Table 6- List of different type of stakeholders ...... 58 Table 7- PESTLE table for current and proposed shop ...... 61 Table 8- Strengths and weaknesses of Kerameikos heritage shop ...... 72 Table 9- Product development, processes and examples...... 74 Table 10- Staff abilities and competencies, training and education recommendations ...... 94 Table 11- Purpose of tourist visit ...... 118 Table 12- Tourists recommendations for what they would like to see at Kerameikos ...... 119 Table 13- tourists experiences ...... 119 Table 14- Tourists impressions of Kerameikos ...... 120 Table 15- Tourists general feelings of Kerameikos ...... 122 Table 16- Tourists opinions of what could benefit Kerameikos ...... 122 Table 17- Tourists opinion of negative aspects of the site ...... 123 Table 18- Tourists ages ...... 124 Table 19-Tourists level of education ...... 124 Table 20-Number of locals who visited Kerameikos ...... 125 Table 21- Locals last visit to Kerameikos ...... 125 Table 22- Locals who recognise Kerameikos’ changes...... 125 Table 23-Number of locals who enjoyed Kerameikos before the fence ...... 126 Table 24- Locals opinions of what Kerameikos represents ...... 127 Table 25-Locals general feelings of Kerameikos ...... 128 Table 26- Locals description of last visit to Kerameikos ...... 128 Table 27- Locals opinions of what would enhance Kerameikos ...... 129 Table 28- Locals recommendations for what they would like to see in Kerameikos ...... 129 Table 29- Locals ages ...... 130 Table 30- Locals occupations ...... 131 Table 31- Detailed stakeholders table ...... 157

Figure 1- Revenue (€) from tourism in Greece 2005-2015 ...... 20 Figure 2- Visitation (millions) to Greece 2005-2015 ...... 20 Figure 3 Chart displaying the three departments of TAP...... 23 Figure 4- Poster displaying BIOME message ...... 28 Figure 5- Porter five forces Source: Porters, 2008: 80 ...... 69 Figure 7 - Book ‘KERAMEIKOS’ sold at Kerameikos...... 75 Figure 6- Book ‘The River Eridanos of Ancient Athens’ sold at Kerameikos ...... 75

Figure 8- Kerameikos Archaeological site ...... 96 Figure 9 Grave Stele at Kerameikos ...... 96 Figure 10- Attic Oinochoe ...... 97 Figure 11- Marble bull from the tomb of Dionysios of Kollytos ...... 99 Figure 12- The grave stele of Ampharete ...... 99 Figure 13- Resources and Capabilities ...... 152 Figure 14- Kerameikos current logo, displayed by the ticket office ...... 160 Figure 15- Kerameikos Heritage shop potential logo...... 161 Figure 16- Kerameikos logo design ...... 161 Figure 17- Simple Kerameikos logo design ...... 161 Figure 18- using the more simplistic logo, surrounded by an electronic scanning barcode . 162 Figure 19 -Prototype product for heritage shop ...... 163 Figure 20- Drinking vessels found in Kerameikos Archaeological site museum ...... 163

Acknowledgements

First and foremost we would like to extend an enormous thank you to our supervisors; Dr. Stelios Lekakis and Dr. Kalliopi Fouseki.

We thank Stelios greatly for his help (and ‘strictness’) he has made this writing process pleasant. Furthermore, he has given us the most appropriate and valuable guidance for not only writing this Thesis, but also for our professional lives within the heritage sector. We appreciate and thank you for all that you have done for us.

We would like to hugely thank Kalliopi for her immense help and guidance by going that extra mile for our team. She gave insightful perspectives in how to view our thesis from a different point of view, which we are most thankful for.

Furthermore we (Eve, Glenn, Liz and Natassa) would like to thank each other for continued encouragement, exchange of knowledge and enjoyment throughout this process. Surprisingly, it is one that will be missed.

Finally we would like to thank everyone who has helped write and inspire1 this thesis: Aspasia Louvi-Director of TAP, Niki Dollis-Responsible for the Acropolis Museum Shops, Constantinos-friends Folklore Museum shop, Nicolas Kontoprias- director of Herakleidon museum, the team at the European village, our classmates for the ethnographic research- Asimina Lymperi, Michael Williams, Lena Stefanou and Aris Anagnostopoulos, the branding workshop team, Vasia Terzi for her continued support of the students throughout the year, the cohort of Heritage Management 2014-2015, all the lecturers who taught us throughout the year, the community of Kerameikos, all questionnaire and interview participants, Athens University of Business and Economics, the University of Kent, all the cafés we spent hours working at and last, but not least, our friends and family.

1 We would like to also acknowledge the photographers whose work we used Instagram users Katerina ‘venividivici2312’ and Dimitris Kalavros-Gousiou.

Chapter one- Introduction

Hidden within the centre of Athens is Kerameikos, an archaeological site full of history and life. In both tangible and intangible ways it is a place that truly represents the beginnings of western civilisation. Yet it is practically nonexistent to those that live in or visit Athens. Those who are not interested in such sites do not care for it. So what can be done to entice people from all walks of life to visit, to learn from and enjoy the site? This question can resonate with other heritage sites that may ask the same thing. A country like Greece, so rich in heritage deserves to have an outlet in which exemplifies Greek heritage and allows those that visit to gain an educational and valuable experience from this heritage. This field study thesis proposes that this can be done through a new era of heritage shops, using Kerameikos archaeological site as case study. Not Museum, gift or souvenir shops, but Heritage shops will allow visitors to extend their experience of a heritage site; these experiences can be educational, atmospheric, sensory etc. Whatever a site means to an individual, heritage shops cater to this and can also contribute and impact positively to the local and wider economy. Kerameikos has the potential to engage the visitors it greatly deserves; this can be done through the values related to the site. These prized values, however, are not communicated enough. Kerameikos has the biggest room and prospective for improvement to establish a new heritage shop. This Field study thesis is not affiliated with any heritage organisations and was created tabula rasa, in order to illuminate to other heritage professionals how to institute a new era heritage shop within Greece. The research question posed is whether this new era heritage shop is feasible in Kerameikos and can this feasibility be extended to the rest of Greek heritage sites? It is feasible, and it is imperative for the regeneration of Kerameikos and Greek heritage.

The first half of this thesis analyses the scarce existing research made on museum, gift and souvenir shops and their beneficial changes over time to propose that this new era shop will be referred to as a heritage shop. It further examines the current climate of Greece in conjunction with the existing research; displaying an urgent need for change within the heritage private and public commercial sectors. Since tourist visitation levels have grown within Greece, owing to the relatively cheap economy, there is a necessity and a justification to establish a new era of Greek Heritage shops. This thesis highlights weaknesses within Greece’s current museum, gifts and souvenirs shops and the need to evolve. Many shops in Greece are old-fashioned and conventional, therefore in the second half of the thesis, a case

8 study of Kerameikos archaeological site/museum is proposed for this new evolution of heritage shops, with the mission of Kerameikos ‘explore, educate and engage’ in mind. Processes in the case study are benchmarking, interviews, questionnaires, SWOT and PESTLE analyses etc. This paper can been seen as a catalyst for the need to create a new world of heritage shops that currently do not exist in Greece, starting with Kerameikos archaeological site.

Chapter two- Literature Review Introduction Research and discussion regarding retailing at heritage sites is lacking in current literature; almost all scholars only specifically talk about the museum shop and very rarely mention shops at any other heritage site. There is no agreed upon term to describe such shops. Therefore, we have penned the term ‘heritage shop’ as a shop that sells products directly relating to a specific heritage site, museum or cultural centre. Some scholars will use the term ‘gift shop’ (Lockstone, 2007: 66 and Toepler, 2007: 162), which is an inadequate description since a heritage shop is so much more than simply a place for gifts or souvenirs. It is a place for extending the experience of the heritage site or a museum. Although one can find heritage and heritage shops everywhere, it is quite surprising that the literature concerning these shops is somewhat scarce; even though almost all museum professionals talk about the crucial role that retailing plays in the day to day running of the museum and in the extension, or enhancement of the museum experience. This paper will shed some light on this topic which currently exists in the dark.

The History and Development of Museum Shops Museums today have changed considerably compared with their predecessors. This evolution is due to a number of factors: the development of new technologies, better research tools and interpretation methods, on-line resources, world class exhibitions and improved visitor facilities, such as shops and cafes. Despite all of the changes and improvements to museums, their objectives remain the same; to find a balance between providing an educational service to society at the same time as creating a steady income to support their activities. (Slater, 2007: 91).

Commercial activities are not a new development for museums, the first being established in 1857 (McPherson, 2007: 49). However, these activities developed slowly with limited success, it was not until the 1960’s when ancillary services in museums adopted a significant change in approach. It was the Metropolitan Museum of Art from the late 1960’s that has been identified as beginning the trend of merchandising and visitor focus over acquisition; a trend that many other museums would then follow after seeing their success (Toepler, 2007: 162-163).

At the end of the 20th century, Rottenberg (2002: 21) identifies the two major trends that escalated in museums as ‘the prevalence of a new market-oriented ideology that stressed

10 the importance of revenue generation’ and ‘the introduction of new technologies’. This may be due to economic and political factors that affect the museum and lead to the emergence of new ideologies to increase attraction and financial gains from the museum shop (McPherson, 2007: 48). With this emerged a more customer based approach in the museum shop, making it like a business creating a shift from solely being a financial contributor to becoming a contributor to the museum experience (Kovach, 2014: 103). This is the most fundamental change; museums now exist to serve the general public, whereas in the past the prime focus was tending the needs of its collection, rather than its visitors who were mainly the upper class. Because of this shift, many museums have now turned retailing into a core part of the visitor experience, not just something ancillary. In effect the museum shop has become central to the museum service as the importance of its role has increased dramatically in recent years (McPherson, 2007: 53) and retailing is predicted to play a greater role concerning the visitor’s overall museum experience in the future, (Kent, 2010: 68, G. McPherson, 2007: 54 and Foley, 2000: 172) especially if outside factors continue to effect museums and heritage sites.

With the decreasing amount of funding available for heritage sites and museums worldwide, dependence on Government and NGO funding alone is not enough to ensure a sustainable future for many sites. Statistics from the National Museum Director’s Conference showed museums in the UK receive very little public funding (National Museum Director’s Conference, 2009). Museums have experienced ‘unprecedented level of cuts to public funding...Local authority and national museums have been particularly badly hit’ (Museums association, 2014). Reiterating this point is the British Museum which faces ‘a major financial challenge as a result of a significant reduction in funding from government.’ This funding has been cut by a further 15% over the past four years (British Museum annual report 2013: 16). The current situation in Greece highlights even more the issue of government spending cuts, and experts predict that the cultural sector will receive the most serious cuts in the near future (Curbed, 2015). An increased trend in commercialisation in the cultural sector, at least for the last fifteen years, is a direct response to these cuts, seen throughout the world (Toepler, 2007: 162). As mentioned, this means that increased pressure is placed on museums and heritage sites to act more like businesses.

In the last 40 years, the function of museums have extended from simply being a place of collection, preservation and research of objects (Kent, 2010:67) and are now recognising the need to adapt to better compete in the global environment so that they may become more

11 accountable, self-sustaining and appealing to a wider audience (McPherson, 2007: 54). These changes have encouraged the development of museum stores so that they are increasingly being recognised as essential to the total museum function (Mottner, 2007: 141). This importance is not only because of economic benefits, but also the enhanced experience they offer to the public by extending the museum’s core mission and identity.

Heritage Shop Definition Since the 1960’s (Toepler, 2007: 162-163), museum shops have developed and are still developing for the purpose of extending the museum experience (Kovach, 2014: 103), mission and identity (Mottner, 2007: 141). However, the term ‘museum shop’ reflects the ‘old style’ shop, its sole purpose being for profit and this type of shop is usually only applied to museums. As previously stated the phrase ‘heritage shop’ has been coined, truly embodying the new generation of heritage site shops that has come about in the past few decades; the extension of the site experience, encompassing the values of the heritage site, whilst simultaneously educating visitors. A heritage shop does not simply coexist as an extension of a particular museum, but also as an extension of other heritage related sites, such as historic houses, archaeological sites etc. Below is a definition of ‘heritage’ and ‘shop’, when combined define the new term of ‘heritage shop’

Heritage is universally difficult to define. The Oxford English dictionary (OED) definition of heritage: ‘that which has been or may be inherited; any property, and esp. land, which devolves by right of inheritance’ ((a) 1989). This definition does not truly show what heritage is since the University of Massachusetts defines heritage as ‘the full range of our inherited traditions, monuments, objects, and culture.’ (2015). Furthermore, Smith expresses heritage as something cultural ‘involved in the construct and regulation of a range of values and understanding’ (Smith, 2006: 11).

The OED defines a shop as ‘a building or part of a building where goods or services are sold: shop’ ((b) 1989).

With these definitions in mind, and in combination with today’s consumer culture, a heritage shop is an extension of a heritage site. However, this consumerism is channeled in such a way that the products sold are an extension of the experience and values of a site as well as a further avenue for educating visitors. In order to create a heritage shop the following is needed:

• Public engagement • Products that relate to the heritage site’s values • Reinvestment of finances for the site, shop and/or surrounding areas • Enhancing educational values for the site • An extension and completion of the heritage experience

Distinguishing Features of a Heritage Shop As stated a heritage shop should make obvious its connection and relationship with the site or museum that it is attached to. Because of their social goals and core mission, museums strive to retain a higher ethical standard than other retail stores when it comes to the merchandise sold. (McLean, 1997: 167). Unfortunately however, this is not always the case. According to our research, many heritage shops offer generic souvenir products and some shops barely show a connection with the museum at all, failing to reflect its image (e.g. Museum of the City of Athens, Guildhall Museum, UK. See benchmarking section). It should be obvious that the shop exists as an extension of the museum and not simply an extra avenue to gain profit (Kovach, 2014: 111) and to achieve this, a balance must be found with the products offered within the museum shop. High quality, expensive and specialised products, although they may be very educational, might not sell well and fail to generate revenue, whereas low quality inexpensive products may sell a lot, but fail to offer anything educational and thus fail to reflect the museum’s mission (McLean, 1997: 168). This is emphasised by Theobold that the most significant feature of the heritage shop which distinguishes itself from ordinary gift shops is the ‘application of educational obligations to the tenets of good retailing’ (Theobald, 2000, cited in Kovach, 2014: 117). Ethically, heritage shops might make it a priority to establish policies that reflect exactly what the museum offers and represents.

The Heritage Shop Environment Buyer behaviour is influenced by the total shop environment. These environmental attributes include location, atmosphere, service, merchandise and display (for further information on shop environmental atmospherics and how this influences visitor behaviour see Kent, 2010: 69, Ward and Davies 2005, Greenland and McGoldrick 1994, Turley and Chabat 2002, Arnould et al. 2004, Doering 2007, Kotler 1999). Important for this study that can be concluded from the research is the fact that the shop environment plays a very crucial role in affecting visitor’s cognitive, physiological and emotional behaviour, either

13 positively or negatively. Museum shop purchases can be nostalgic collectibles, personal reminders of the visit, symbolic totems and circulation of cultural knowledge and identity, (Kent,2010: 68) and so shop products are ideal when they relate to the museum’s exhibits either specifically or generally (Ambrose, 2006: 70). In fact museums and other heritage sites are well placed to create a competitive advantage by differentiating themselves from the competition by utilising the values of the site and its collection, and manifesting these values into the products. This creates something unique that is not easily replicable.

Benefits of a Heritage Shop According to the literature, there are essentially three main reasons to establish a heritage shop:

1. Service According to a museum shop visitor study conducted at the Imperial War Museum, London, respondent’s enjoyment concerning the shop mainly hinged on two broad categories; variety in the range of products and the clear display and layout of the shop (Kent, 2010: 73). It is inside the shop that the senses are allowed full engagement with the products (Kent, 2010: 74). Another study conducted by McIntyre builds on this added service, showing that museum and gallery shops are considered as important for extending the core visit experience and provide the chance for active interaction with the objects on display (McIntyre, 2010: 195). Heritage shops also offer the opportunity to take home a reminder of the visit and at the same time show us that objects carry meaning with them, meaning that you apply to the object yourself. It demonstrates that bought objects can be special in terms of creating a narrative for the buyer (Macdonald, 2012: 52).

2. Education According to ICOM’s code of ethics for museums ‘Museums have an important duty to develop their educational role and attract wider audiences from the community, locality or group they serve. Interaction with the constituent community and promotion of their heritage is an integral part of the educational role of the museum’ (Ambrose, 2006: 15). The products inside the museum shop can open up a deeper understanding of the museum’s collection and support the educational goals (Buber, 2009: 5-6).

3. Finance ‘The museum’s dilemma in a nutshell is how to achieve the proper balance whereby the educational goals maintain their ascendency and the profits grow’ (Theobald, 2009, 5-6). Museums must achieve this balance in order to maintain the museum experience and maintain profit; however there is a very close link in museums between economic and cultural values (Burtenshaw, 2014: 52). Finance and education are the dual objectives of the heritage shop (Mottner, 2005: 830-831). Unfortunately however, museum shops have been criticised as developing solely for financial reasons, taking little notice of what the public wants or needs (McLean, 1997: 117). The fear is that if there is too much concentration on income generation, this may damage the commitment to education as well (Ferrero, 2005: 254). Buber (2009: 2) expands by suggesting two more contributions that a museum shop should make:

 It should be strongly integrated into the identity of the organisation  The shop must make available its activities to the public

These two additional contributions of the museum shop become important for the success of the shop as a business. A clear identity of the shop and connecting with that of the organisation will ensure a common direction and longevity of the shop. Activities being made available to the public will contribute to an increase in customer base and ultimately allow the shop to reach a wider public. Heritage shops have the opportunity to capitalise on the fact that a typical day out activity often has shopping involved for many people.

Extending Experience and Enhancing Value An extension of the site

As mentioned, museum visitors consider the shop as an important part of the overall site experience (McIntyre, 2010: 181 and Buber, 2009: 6). This means that, unlike generic souvenir shops, heritage shops have the capacity to expand and promote the values of the site/museum, enhance the educational experience as well as offering future memories of the visit to take home. The experience that the visitor remembers when going to a museum

15 is potentially every bit as important as the exhibition objects on display. Some scholars have even argued that some visitors do not make a distinction between the museum experience and the store experience; rather they are fused together as one combined visit (Mottner and Ford, 2005: 833). This will certainly be the case for people whose sole purpose is to purchase something from the shop, perhaps as a gift, and not visit the museum.

Enhanced Learning

The heritage shop helps to merge recreation with education. As an extension to exhibitions, the shop can contribute to the educational experience through having appealing and informative displays (Kovach, 2014: 108). Valuable products can create familiarity with particular artefacts that may have been missed during the core visit (Kovach, 2014: 113).

A sensory experience

The heritage shop offers different experiences that the visitor does not usually get from the site visit. A visit to a museum or heritage site restricts the visitor’s sensory experience to sight and sometimes hearing and smell, but touch is almost always prohibited, apart from in more interactive learning centres and museums. Behaviour that stands out when visitors enter a heritage shop; they touch and seem to act less restricted. Extended sensory experiences offered by the heritage shop are one of the main reasons for its appeal.

Marketing the Museum Shop As stated, shopping and heritage are becoming more closely linked in today’s consumer world. People continue to purchase heritage products while travelling and, according to research, there is evidence to suggest that the tourists who specifically travel to immerse themselves in the culture and heritage of the destination are often greater spenders than other kinds of visitors (Timothy, 2014: 40). Most museums have two main objectives; the first is to collect, maintain and preserve their collection, and the second to offer an educational experience for the public. The museum shop can contribute to these two objectives by generating additional funding and adding to the educational and experiential enhancement through retail marketing strategies (Mottner, 2007: 141). The marketing plan is essential for this success as it strives to improve upon what the visitor wants in terms of experience, education and enjoyment, at the same time developing a closer relationship between the museum and visitor. Product decisions for the museum shop may be both market driven (customer focus) and mission driven (education,

16 collection) (Mottner, 2007: 142). However, most museums will face some form of constraint when it comes to making product decisions (See Greek legal framework section, and interview with Aspasia Louvi – Head of TAP).

Retail marketing strategies will support the museum’s mission with appropriate products and services that contribute to education, enjoyment and fostering a closer relationship between visitor and the museum (Buber, 2009: 2). This can lead to competitive advantage and positive financial return through differentiation (Buber, 2009: 5-6, Mottner and Ford, 2005: 833).

Fears and Criticisms Regarding the Commercialisation of Heritage There are many fears from scholars and museum professionals that a museum may become opportunist in the future as a venue only for popular entertainment with no regard for standards of quality, authenticity, professionalism and education. Put in stark contrast; is the museum shop about materialism and profit whereas the museum is meaning and culture (Macdonald, 2012: 44)? There are concerns that we are witnessing movement away from the original museum mission to preserve and to educate as museums become more focussed on recreation and pleasure (McPherson, 2007: 55), and once the core mission of the museum is lost there will cease to be a distinction between the museum and any other leisure centre (Kotler, 2000: 284). However, there is no evidence to suggest that the museum as a leisure centre will conflict with the museum’s role as educators, collectors and protectors of objects.

Today, the power is now largely in the hands of the visitor or consumer when it comes to determining the museum design and what product the museum actually offers (McPherson, 2007: 52). For such objectives, it is important that the curator or site manager has continued involvement in the heritage shop to ensure that it complements the site and prevents it from becoming a separate commercial venture. In practice though, is there a current gap between goals of the museum curator and goals of the shop manager (McIntyre, 2010: 181)? Scholars have argued that there is a detached museum shop function where the museum shop may be ‘viewed by curators as supporting institutional objectives only by providing additional revenue and aiding ongoing institutional awareness via branded ‘souvenir’ merchandise’ (McIntyre, 2010: 183). A contributing factor to this may be the negative perception of commercialisation, which is seen everywhere in today’s consumer society. Perhaps the fear of commercial penetration into museums and heritage sites is a

17 reason why the academic literature concerning heritage shops is so scarce; an anti- commercialisation stance taken up by museum institutions has been termed ‘marketing baiting’ by Mclean (McLean, 1997: 42 and McIntyre, 2010: 184), and risks damaging the authenticity of the museum.

Chapter three- Current Analysis

Greece was once the centre of the ancient world, due to its phenomenal contribution to modern civilization. Nowadays, Greece reminds us little of its former glory, as it currently struggles through an economic crisis, as mentioned above, which caused unprecedented modifications to its financial and social structures (Platia, 2015).

The Greek debt crisis was triggered by an international economic recession that started in 2008, affecting many countries worldwide. An unavoidable ‘loan Facility Agreement’ (May 2010) followed by a ‘Memorandum’ which was signed between Greece, the Eurozone countries and the International Monetary Fund (Mavromatis, 2015). Consequently, Greece’s contemporary situation is characterized by a rapid and continuous financial, political and societal change. The heritage sector could not stay untouched under these unstable circumstances. Over the past three years, funding to the Ministry of Culture has dropped by 50% (Mavromatis, 2013). This economic crisis has impacted negatively upon 240 archaeological museums, 250 archaeological sites/digs and 19,000 protected monuments, of them 862 designated monuments and sites (Ministry of Culture (a), (b), (c) 2015).

There is a lack of new positions and young professionals; those who are employed are only for short-term contracts, lasting 3 to 8 months (Platia, 2015). Senior employees with high salaries were forced into retirement and the salaries of those who remained employed were cut significantly. A large number of employees working in the cultural sector have also been dismissed, while a respectable amount of young scholars and qualified professionals look to other countries for jobs (Platia, 2015). Moreover, the State authorities are unable to fund or implement any projects concerning the protection, conservation, management and promotion of monuments and sites (Mavromatis, 2013). Greek excavations and research, which are mostly funded by the EU, have been immobilized (Platia, 2015).

In addition, Ephorates of antiquities have been merged to reduce costs and employee numbers (Platia, 2015) and museums are closing because of staff shortages (e.g. the National archaeological museum (Lalios, 2015) and Kerameikos where two of the three

18 entrances are closed). The cuts also put sites and museums at greater risk of looting and clandestine excavations (Romeo, 2015). Illicit trafficking of cultural property has increased by 25% over the past three years (Mavromatis, 2013, Thermou, 2012). This includes the 2012 robbery of priceless artefacts stolen from the Archaeological Museum of Olympia, the museum being protected by a single guard (Thermou, 2012). Similar incidents continue to happen throughout Greece (Romeo, 2015).

At Knossos archaeological site in July 2015, it was revealed that no receipts were given after selling products from the museum shop. The explanation for this was due to ‘administration malfunctions’, but really emphasizes the government’s shortcomings of the last decades (Rigopoulos, 2015).

Nevertheless, despite these shortcomings, in the past years there was a steady annual increase of tourists visiting Greece and its archaeological sites and museums (Fig.1 and fig.2). This is justified by El. Stat. statistics, where there is a steady increase of both visitation and revenues from tickets paid. In 2014 there was a 22.5% increase in archaeological site visitation, 21.9% increase in museum visitation, with a 27. 5% increase in receipts from sites and 13.5% increase in museums receipts (El. Stat). Furthermore, the 2015 statistics showed that the increase in visitation was unaffected by the capital controls, presenting an increased number of visitation from 2014. As the year is not yet complete only the period January – July has been published. Comparing the same period of 2014 there was an increase of museums visitors and a 12.7% increase in revenues. Respectively there were increases in archaeological sites with visitation up by 8.6% and 12.7% in revenues.

86% of revenues from archaeological sites and museums in Greece come from the tickets, but the proportion of ticket revenues in England reach only 26% of total revenues, while France is even lower (McKinsey, 2012 and SETE, 2012). The average revenue per visitor in Greece is €6.1 comparing to €19.7 of the European average.

Figure 1- Revenue (€) from tourism in Greece 2005-2015

Figure 2- Visitation (millions) to Greece 2005-2015

From the beginning of the economic turmoil, Greece’s cultural sector has responded with a process of ‘gradual adjustment’ without making any concrete structural changes to its cultural policies. This point is reiterated by Fotakis by stating ‘a serious obstacle is the legal framework, which is as big a problem as the funding issues.’ Additionally, according to Platia (2015) these problems are a result of a bureaucratic government and an incapacity to evaluate or compare performances and social impacts; making it difficult for the governing bodies to deal effectively with the economic crisis (discussed further in the legal framework chapter). The ongoing financial crisis cannot be taken as an excuse for cuts in culture (Mavromatis, 2013) because culture still provides opportunities for economic growth and it is perceived as a force for stability and development (Mavromatis, 2013).

Greece is a country of unique heritage and outstanding universal value. Instead of perceiving the crisis as an external constraint and wait for its end or recovery (Platia, 2015), it is time for Greece to regain its popularity as a heritage tourism destination. It is important to mention that in times of severe difficulties new structural frameworks have a chance of being accepted (Platia 2015). This could lead to a new way of interpreting the crisis as an opportunity to restructure the entire system (Platia, 2015); leveraging on Greek civilization and culture as the vehicle which will lead the country out of recession and to a world-leading position in tourism.

Future Plans

 The launch of the electronic ticket(e-ticketing) by summer 2016, that will allow tourists to book their tickets though the internet  Respectable increase in ticket prices for visiting archaeological sites and museums (Protothema, 2015)  Also 17 new multiple tickets for visiting more than one archaeological sites and museums at the same region (Naftemporiki, 2015)

Chapter Four- Greek Legal Framework

Legislative framework of the Archaeological Receipts Fund

The Archaeological Receipts Fund (TAP) is a public corporation, under the Ministry of Culture, located in Athens. TAP has eight major purposes (Appendix 1) which are abided by from its establishment in 1977 (Law 736/1977), (Law 3711/2008: 3840).

According to what is written on the website (TAP, 2015) The Archaeological Receipts Fund is evolving and trying to upgrade its organisational structures. TAP is responsible for:

 The management of archaeological resources from stable sources of revenue as we ass productive activities that utilize elements of our cultural heritage  General support of the archaeological services work  The expropriation of property for archaeological purpose  The emission procedure of the ‘card of culture’

The TAP Board is appointed upon the advice of the Central Archaeological Council (Law 2557/1997: 9385) for a three year term service, which is composed of 8 members (Law 1064/1980):

 (1)President, Economist, Professor of a University with expertise in Financial Planning or Operations Research  (4) A’ level Curator  Representative of Chamber of Commerce  Senior official of the General Accounting Office  Reeve of the State Legal Council

This board manages and controls all the services, finances, other resources and decides all issues concerning TAP and what costs will be adopted after receiving funds.

Up to 40% of annual cash money from TAP is rendered as public revenue to the State Budget and is allocated for the payment of expenses to the Ministry’s Department of Cultural Heritage and Tourism regarding projects and tasks, activities, supplies and operational needs. By a joint decision of the Ministry of Finance and Culture and Tourism the

22 attributable proportion of money and the necessary details for the implementation of the aforementioned arrangement are determined (Law4071 / 2012, Article 45, 9 a).

The powers of the President and the Board are specifically analyzed in the founding decree, which is adhered to until today. It should be noted that at times there have been some changes with several law revisions meaning the entire statute has changed from 1977.

Revenues of TAP (Appendix 1) may seem a lot, but expenses (Appendix 1) of the body are much higher to be able to meet its obligations.

The basic structure of the Archaeological Receipts Fund is divided into three departments (Fig.3). The responsibilities of each are analyzed in the organization’s statute of establishment and apply today. This document is not considered necessary to further develop the competencies of each department because it does not serve the research purposes. The following chart arises:

Chairman of the Board

Department of mapping Management Department of and Buildings' Department Publications Conservation

Department of Human Resources Surveying and Land Archaeological 's Department Registry Department Bulletin Extradition

Department for Accounting department Publication of Research Department Archaeological Dialects

Technicla Curation Department of Department of Inspection and Control Publications

Casts and Replicas Desk of Publications Workshops Archive

Secreterial Desk of the Managerial Board

Figure 3 Chart displaying the three23 departments of TAP

Shop

There is no specific document certified legally on TAP’s shops regarding the organization and operation so far. One can identify provisions concerning actions taken by all TAP services, the Ministry of Culture and all government entities, as they follow a single legislative framework without specifying in each sector separately.

Products - Competitions - Suppliers

Assuming that someone is interested in creating a product for economic or commercial purposes, without engaging TAP in manufacturing processes, he should follow the law 3028/2002, Chapter 6, Article 46, paragraph 4 (Appendix 2) that indicates how one should follow this procedure. For an individual to make a product they must participate in TAP run competitions. These competitions are usually lengthy and detailed, meaning that the competitor may make much more effort to collect all the necessary documents needed in order for his involvement to be legitimate, whereas the financial rewards will be very few.

When dealing with the creation of products, there are two kinds of competitions. The first is to produce products that have been reproduced in the past with specific technical specifications and maximum bid price. The second is the production of new products where technical specification and the budget of the project are listed in the publication of the call. Each competition is open to companies or individuals who have expertise in a specific product industry. It is considered mandatory for a presentation to sample the products. The selection criteria are defined by the cheapest price per product code and the decision is taken by a three person committee. As mentioned, the product needs to meet certain technical specifications with the contractor’s obligations to include the adjustment of each copy and packaging in nylon bags. The competition call is posted on TAP’s website and the National Printing Office.

Those participating in the competition should:

 Demonstrate the required experience by submitting samples of similar work in a closed box.  Submit copies of contracts with other cultural institutions of all types.  Present their company by describing in detail from the equipment available up to the financial standing of the company.

 Submit the CVs of staff who create products and related portfolios of the project they have undertaken.

Additionally, the dossier of participation documents should include (apart from the financial offer of the person concerned)

 A certificate of business registration from the Chamber of Commerce up to one year before the day of the contest.  A statement of the Law 1599/86 taking into consideration the authenticity of the signature of the candidates.  A statement that the candidates have not been convicted for criminal behaviour.

After the submission of the completed documentation, the Commission will open only to those whose documentation is adequate. Once the Commission decides who the contractor is, the latter is invited to sign the contract within 10 days. Before signing he must submit all documents confirming that his business is legal and a letter of guarantee for good performance of the agreement. The contractor, in continuous cooperation with TAP, is responsible for supervising and monitoring the competition. TAP has defined the phases of the work, delivery dates and terms of payment to each competitor. However, it should be noted that every product produced is different and is liable to changes to the depositions of the documents needed.

After February 2014 TAP’s calls of interest changed and there began talks about cultural productions of applications or inspired applications (Appendix 1). These invitations indicated that the Archaeological Receipts Fund is responsible for the operation of shops at archaeological sites and museums (except Acropolis Museum).

As part of the Archaeological Receipts Fund its commercial strategy is to widen the circle of products sold and to enrich it with products that are original, modern, with high standards and are in line with the aesthetics and style of shops in museums and archaeological sites.

The main laws that should be adhered to are:

 N.736 / 1977 Regarding the Archaeological Receipts Fund  N.3028 / 2002 for the Protection of Antiquities and Cultural Heritage.  N.4281 / 2014 Support and development measures of the Greek economy, organizational issues of Ministry of Finance and other provisions.

 Presidential Decree 118/2007 Government Procurement Policy  Decree 113/2010 Commitment by authorizing officers

Those who are eligible for the competition are private traders or businesses, designers, graphic designers, artists, folk art product suppliers and manufacturers that do business in related disciplines. They are invited to present original ideas and write proposals for new useful products geared towards the needs of TAP, inspired by the ancient and Byzantine culture, viewed through a contemporary perspective. The selection criteria will be both economic and aesthetic. The service will have the capacity to reject a proposal because of negative aesthetic effect, even if the financial bid is accepted and vice versa.

Each proposal takes into account the following criteria:

 Inspiration and relevance with the exhibits of museums or archaeological sites  Originality, innovation, modern approach and quality  High material quality and processing  Value for money  Merchantability Assessment and needs of the specific types of sale  Packaging and printing "background" (a historic text will be given by the Cultural Product Promotion Office) on a separate tab on the packaging or on the same product.

Bureaucracy – Lack of Money

As stated throughout this paper, and reiterated by the Deputy Minister of Culture Nikos Xydakis, funds are lower today than in previous years, but ‘there is willpower, determination and energy to offer in culture.’ He added that there is another approach to cultural projects, but also in the culture itself, because culture offers identity, self-awareness and pride to society and citizens. He continued by saying that the Ministry’s projects should be a double investment, both symbolic and material. They have the aspiration that even with few financial resources the Ministry of Culture will be able to offer new jobs and wealth production. The aim is to contribute to the local and national economy. (To Vima, 2015)

Revenue from the cultural sector is an estimated €40 million, but could reach €300 million according to the McKinsey company study, prepared in 2012 for the Ministry of Culture. (Poutetsi, 2015). TAP’s turnover is estimated at €70 million. From this, €57 million come from shop sales. However, TAP has no accountant says Mr. Xydakis, (this is confirmed by

Aspasia Louvi in the interview chapter). The utilization of products sold that constitute ‘branding’ for cultural heritage is the first priority of the new Board of TAP, while he stated that the procurement process is ‘very bureaucratic and a deterrent’ (Poutetsi, 2015).

An additional problem in this situation is the bureaucracy that creates issues concerning support of culture and the minister underlined that ‘”bad” bureaucracy can be trampled down in many ways’. He supplements that a healthy bureaucracy is necessary, as is known by the general public (To Vima, 2015). Another problem is the inactivity and negligence of public services, which requires consolidation.

An important role in the development aspect of culture is the Creative (Orange) Finance; (Kalou, 2014) for the production of goods and services based on knowledge, innovation and culture, as now emphasis will be given in the disposal of venues and publicity to art groups.

Lack of trained staff

Article 13 of Law 736/1977 refers to all working fields of permanent staff and of those that fall under private law with the appointment qualifications, which someone is required to satisfy, and how many positions are available from TAP to be filled. For most positions the law from 1977 has remained untouched, however in 2013 the qualifications for ‘sales assistants of Casts and Copies' were changed as staff were required to have more specialized knowledge; These qualifications (Archaeological Receipts Fund, 2013, P.Ν: DIOIK / A / 3309) are as follows:

 Computer Knowledge in: word processing, spreadsheets and computer network services  Good knowledge of English or French or German Language  Diploma training of any sector specializing in Financial and Administrative Services or Bachelor of Technical Vocational School regardless of specialization or Degree from Technical Vocational School of any specialization in the Economy and Management sector or Lyceum certificate or Technical Vocational High School, regardless of specialization.

A key role in the vendor’s selection plays the time of unemployment, if one has many children or coming from such a family, if one has underage children, if he is the parent or child of single parent family, the basic degree mark and the previous professional experience. For some positions and locality also counts positively. Most of these contracts

27 are for eight months and they do not allude to job permanence. (See appendix 3 for proposed human resources)

Associations who achieved their goal by indirect ways

A very interesting move is the Labor Association of Industrial Mining (BIOME) (Labor Association in Industrial Mining, 2012). The miners who had remained unpaid since May 2011 decided to take action of self-managing their industries. The dominant idea is that they do not want to lose their jobs, but wanted to give work opportunities to locals and replace their bosses. Their motto is a very positive message that says ‘You can’t? But we can!’

The association has created a blog (BIOME, 2015) in which their actions are blogged about frequently, including court matters. They also have a Facebook page where they request support and solidarity from other organizations and individuals. To meet the financial and sustainable needs of their targets the association accepts donations with it being possible to sign up as a member with a minimum annual payment of €3 and for the unemployed and students, the price is €1.5. (See appendix 4 for statutes of establishing these associations)

Figure 4- Poster displaying BIOME message

Source: BIOME, 2012

Private legal entities under the supervision of Ministry of Culture

The law 2557/1997, titled ‘Institutions, measures and actions of cultural heritage’, deals with the promotion and enhancement of cultural heritage, the museum policy and all research bodies for the promotion of culture. The Ministry, as shown in the example of the European Centre for Byzantine and Post-Byzantine monuments of Thessaloniki, supervises private entities that are set up in order to meet their goals and objectives relating to the promotion and preservation of culture as a public asset. The new body has specific objectives, which are implemented by concrete actions, and maintains its viability through government grants, TAP's grants, revenue from events and productions, donations, legacies, income from private sources or from any other lawful source. The Board of Directors are appointed by the Minister of Culture, and members should be trained appropriately in relation to the Body’s cause. The staff come from the public sector, but may be enhanced by employment contracts or projects. Because this body type is under the umbrella of the Ministry of Culture, it means that it accepts all the benefits of belonging to the public sector.

In the aforementioned model we can distinguish some flexibility that leaves room for initiatives and free movement for the achievement of the organization’s objectives. On the positive side is financial assistance that is accepted in any legal way that indicates a form of independence in the decision of money use. A negative aspect is that the designation of the Board is made by the Minister himself, which can lead to Clientelism and patronage and the work of the institution may be impeded. The staff’s selection should be based on criteria that relate specifically to the vacancy that is to be filled.

Friends of museum

Another interesting model of cultural promotion is associations called ‘Friends of the Museum’. (An example of which can be seen in the interview chapter with the friends of the museum of folk art). These unions are composed by many members who help in a museum’s promotion and exposure by offering any kind of assistance as defined by their statutes. In some museum statutes, one of the museum’s goals is the creation of "Friends of the Museum", so as to create a community that will support the organization’s actions. (E.g. Acropolis Museum Law 3771/2008).

The above is one way of offering help to the museum or archaeological site and to overcome some of the difficulties, as previously mentioned, that may occur. The objectives of these ‘friends of the museums’ manifold and serve the needs of the organization they cater to.

These needs vary, that is why the ‘Friends of the Museum’ offer varying services (For the basic principles of establishment see appendix 1).

The friends of Museums has flexibility and can make faster decisions on issues concerning the promotion and publicity of the museum / archaeological site that it serves. For example, if a museum wants to find money to organize an event but cannot request money from TAP the ‘Friends’ have the capacity to organize a campaign of financial support so the event can take place.

Community Initiatives

This latest model is where all members have the same rights and their opinions have equal importance. This union is not created for profit but the motives serve a higher purpose than finance and involve all stakeholders. Because it is a creation from society to society, everything is done transparently and with ease; there is communication between all members and the results of this affect everyone directly as everybody contributes. As the organisation is unstructured this delays procedures and actions. A typical example is the European Village next to Plato's Academy, which will be analyzed in the Interview Chapter.

The aforementioned laws impact and hinder the processes involved in heritage shops and this can be seen throughout the paper. Since these laws are restricting, they do not allow for development within the heritage shop.

Chapter Five - Heritage shops in Greece Questionnaire summary

The following questionnaire was asked to research current heritage shops in Greece, compared to the rest of the world, and how the results of the previous chapter’s research affect them.

Participants: 107

1. Have you ever visited a heritage shop in Greece?

Yes- 82%

If yes, what shops?

Heritage shops visited in Greece

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

Chart 1- Heritage shops which Questionnaire recipients have visited

Other shops mentioned were: Folk Art Museum, Natural History- Crete- Museum, National Archaeological Museum Chania, Delphi Archaeological site Museum, Old Rhodes town Museum, Vergina Archaeological site Museum, Ancient Agora Museum, Athens University History Museum, Water Power.

No-18%

The reason for the answer ‘no’ was either the museum shop was too expensive or they were not interested in buying anything.

Question one was asked to see which museum/archaeological site shops the participants could remember going to and why. The results indicate that the majority of people who visit heritage sites would visit the accompanying shop. The percentage of people that did not visit the shop was low, indicating a need for a heritage shop since most people visit them as part of the overall heritage experience (McIntyre, 2010: 191). The most memorable shops on the list were the Acropolis Museum, Benaki Museum and National Archaeological Museum. These shops have been benchmarked accordingly (see benchmarking section). However, correlation between people who have visited many heritage shops and people who work in the heritage sector may affect the results, since those that work in the heritage sector are likely to visit more heritage sites than those who do not.

Best Heritage Shops in Greece

Benaki Museum Acropolis Cycladic Other

Chart 2- Best heritage shops in Greece according to questionnaire recipients

2a. what was the best Heritage Shop that you have visited in Greece? - excludes the people who answered ‘no’ to question one.

The main reason that people chose these museums is for their uniqueness, variety and quality of the products which, as explained in the literature review, is vital for a heritage shop.

2b. what was the best Heritage Shop that you have visited outside of Greece?

Best Heritage shops outside of Greece

Louvre Victoria and Albert Museum Tate Modern British Museum Museum of Modern Art, New York

Chart 3- Best heritage shops in the world according to questionnaire recipients

Question two was asked to explore whether there are certain heritage shops that appear to do better than others. The results indicate that the better heritage shops are the Acropolis, Benaki and Cycladic art museums, similar to the results in question one where these museums were among the most memorable that the participants had visited. Given that these are private museums, it may indicate that there is a correlation between the laws of the government (as discussed in the previous chapter) and good museum shops being private. Question 2b examines what heritage site worldwide has the best shop. Answers were the louvre, the British Museum and MOMA museum, New York. The reasons for this were because of uniqueness, quality, price and themes of products sold. Other shops mentioned were the Museum of London and the Viking Centre (see benchmarking section), the National Gallery London, Ashmolean Museum, Kiasma Museum Helsinki, Palace of Versailles, Pompeii, Naples Museum, Prague old Town, Gemäldegalerie Berlin, Bologna Traditional Museum and The Entombed Warriors in Xian.

3. On a scale of 1 to 5 what is your overall opinion on Greek heritage shops (1 being bad, 5 being great)?2

1. 8% 2. 32% 3. 35% 4. 20% 5. 5%

The majority of people think that Greek heritage shops are bad. 75% of people think that Greece has average to bad museum/archaeological site shops. Question three corresponds well with question two, that the majority of people thought that Greek heritage shops were bad overall. Reasons for this may be because the Greek heritage shops lacked the aforementioned qualities of international heritage shops, the restricting laws of which the majority of shops in Greece abide by and the current climate of Greece.

4. What have you bought from heritage shops in Greece?

Most popular products in Greek heritage shops 60

Chart 4- Heritage shop products which questionnaire recipients would buy

2 Only 94 people answered

Question four shows that the most popular products are; stationary, bags, ceramics, jewellery, postcards, mugs, replicas, posters, educational toys and calendars. These are generic objects but they can be adapted to the site in a unique way.

5. On average, how many Euros would you usually spend at a heritage shop in Greece?

€0 13% €0.10 - €5 17% €6 - €10 29% €11 - €20 14% €21 - €30 14% €30 - €50 11% €50 + 2%

In museum/archaeological site shops the majority of people spend €6-10. Question five corresponds with question four because the majority of objects chosen in question four are inexpensive, yet at this price (the price may be low because of the current climate discussed in the current analysis section) some products can still be of quality, again reiterating the importance of product quality.

Demographics

The majority of participants in this survey were between the ages of 26-35, female and Greek, many of them work in the heritage sector or are students, with a high level of education holding a MA degree or higher.

From the demographics we can conclude that although most of the participants work in the heritage sector, for those that do not work in this sector, the questionnaire gathered similar results; therefore the data is not biased in favour towards museum/archaeological shops.

Chapter six- S.W.O.T analysis

‘S.W.O.T analyses are critical to the marketing plan, the strengths and weaknesses are determined by internal elements while external forces dictate opportunities and threats’ (Doyle, 2011), and this will be taken into consideration in the following chapters. This S.W. O. T analysis has shown that there are many weaknesses and threats to the current archaeological site shop, however these weaknesses display an opportunity to tackle them and turn weaknesses into strengths. Such an example is establishing a heritage shop that is visible for visitors and offering unique products they would want to buy. These conclusions correlate later recommendations for heritage shops.

Performance Importance Major Minor Neutral Major Minor High Medium Low Strength Strength Weakness Weakness Programmes Core product quality Interpretive quality Information orientation quality Volunteer service quality Facility service

Educational offerings Audience Development Visitorship level

Visitorship diversity Repeat visitorship Visitor service quality Membership programme quality Marketing Image positioning branding effectiveness Public perceptions of accessibility Promotions and communication effectiveness Pricing effectiveness Distribution effectiveness Product mix

Finance Cost/availability of capital Cash flow

Financial sustainability Fundraising effectiveness Government support Earned income support Corporate support Individual giving

Organisation Leadership

Staff Quality Entrepreneurship

Innovativeness

Responsiveness to public Flexibility in organisation

Table 1- SWOT analysis of heritage shops in Greece Source: Kotler, 1998: 70-71

Chapter Seven- Methodology

The methodology of this thesis was formed using different sources, both primary and secondary, and then analysed in various ways so that the recommendations, formed at the end of this paper, can be applied for the proposed Kerameikos Heritage Shop.

The information displayed in the literature review, law framework and current analysis were researched using a variety of existing sources (see bibliography). Specific information on heritage shops is scarce and much of what has been researched was found in articles and online. This research was then analysed from a critical perspective and divided into sections accordingly. This information influences other areas of this paper.

To form the SWOT, Porter’s Five Forces and the PESTLE analyses information was adapted from different sources, the tables and diagrams were found from several articles and lectures. Two SWOT analyses are given; the first is a general analysis of Greek heritage shops, formed with information from the opening chapters of this thesis. The second SWOT was formed with data from the Kerameikos case study chapters.

The questionnaires were formed by taking quantitative data from various demographics. Initially, the questionnaires on heritage shops were physically handed out, however this proved futile. The questionnaires were then re adapted for online recipients, using Google Docs. Each questionnaire had five questions, designed to find the parameters of the awareness levels of Kerameikos and Greek heritage shops. The questions centred on heritage shop products were formed using previous information from the benchmarking, current analysis, literature review and legal section. When 100 recipients answered each questionnaire, the data was then analysed in the form of charts and percentages. Similar methods were used for the rapid ethnographic analyses, but these questionnaires were given out physically. The semi structured interviews use qualitative data in which questions were open ended. Around 10-15 questions were formed and much like the questionnaires, previous information given in this paper shaped the inquiries. These interviews were then summarised in order to make recommendations for our own heritage shop.

In order to form the vision and mission for the Kerameikos heritage shop, goals and envisioned futures for the shop had to be created. Various sources explain that a vision is designed using the SMART method and this was used to form an envisioned future for

Kerameikos heritage shop. A time plan was created in order to accompany SMART. The time plan is an estimate, created assuming that we already have a building.

Much like the time plan, the data and statistics projections were estimated using factual information, taken from the reliable source El. STAT. The data and statistics from EL STAT were put into charts in order to compare and contrast other archaeological sites in Athens with Kerameikos. The ancient Agora was compared to Kerameikos because it is the closest archaeological site and one most similar, this similarity was found from the questionnaires on the rapid ethnographic analysis.

In order to construct the benchmarking criteria information from the questionnaires on heritage shops, literature review and current analysis is used. Benchmarks were a random selection of all museums that could be visited. The questions in the benchmarking were open ended. Information found from the benchmarking was used in the marketing mix (which follows the 7 PS of Marketing), questionnaires, interviews and branding.

The following chapters follow these methodologies so recommendations can be applied to the Kerameikos heritage shop, below is a flow chart in order to explain how heritage professionals, using the methodology given above, can implement a new heritage shop.

Step by step guide

Chart 5- Step by step guide for establishing a heritage shop

Kerameikos Case Study

Chapter eight - Vision and Mission (For a brief history and SOUV of Kerameikos archaeological site please see appendix 5 and 6) Vision Since the museum and archaeological site of Kerameikos does not have a vision, the following is our proposed envisioned future for Kerameikos (Collins and Porras 1996: 65). ‘To be the leading example of heritage shops that enhance the value of the site/museum and extend the visitors education and experience, whilst being able to engage all stakeholders.’ This vision should be S.M.A.R.T. (Mcleod, 2012: 70).

Specific

 To be the leading example of how to strategically run a good heritage shop.  To be the catalyst for a new era of Heritage shops in Greece.  To extend and complete the experience and education of visitors to Kerameikos by offering value related products.

Measurable

 After 6 months of our museum shop being open we will use market research to understand consumer behaviour and needs, through means of questionnaires and interviews.  We exist to create and sell products that relate to the values and heritage of Kerameikos; this will be measured through customer feedback.

Achievable

 From the research made in this paper, it is plausible for there to be a Heritage shop at Kerameikos.

Relevant

 By engaging all stakeholders.  By allowing all a well-rounded heritage experience in our shop.  All products are designed strategically with the values in mind.  Use market research to understand consumer behaviour and needs.

 Use good HR practices and hire those that understand the site and values.  To adjust and be flexible to all internal and external changes.

Time Plan (One year) Assuming that a building is already available (the current situation in Greece complicates obtaining a building over a specific time) this time plan shows the theoretical and practical processes involved in establish a heritage shop.

 The theory, such as research, of the heritage shop should take between 1 and 6 months to complete.  After the practical processes are completed the shop should be opened within 6 months.  Finance reviews, staff training, stakeholder engagement, product research and procurement should remain an ongoing process.

Chart 6- Time plan for research, development and implementation of Kerameikos heritage shop

 After one year we wish to have doubled purchases in our heritage shop comparing them with the current purchases number in the current museum shop.

Mission- Explore, Educate and Engage

This statement of our business should remain unchanged (Business Dictionary, 2015). They are the three E’s; explore, educate and engage.

Explore- This is in conjunction with the site and museum in that the heritage shop is a place to explore, and should be done so using the products and aesthetics of the shop design.

Educate- The archaeological site and museum is a place for the education of all people. We want to emulate this in the heritage shop through our products, which will have information labels attached to them. Other educational avenues found within the shop will include staff knowledge and information posters.

Engage- This engagement is with the local community so that they may be a part of the operational activity of the shop. This is for the benefit of the visitor so that they may take a piece of the site (i.e. a product) away with them to be continually engaged with Kerameikos. Communication with the government is important, in particular with TAP. This is for a better understanding, partnership and support between the private and public sector of heritage, both commercially and economically. Our role is to always engage those that wish to increase tourism and revenues in Greece in a way that is beneficial for the experience of tourists. The table below shows the values related to the mission:

Chart 7- Values of Kerameikos Heritage shop

Chapter nine- Benchmarking

Public or private Public Public

Comments The visitor goes through the shop as the first point of entry into the museum and does not exit through here. The separation between shop and museum is not so clear cut. Poor placement, products seem not to be updated and replaced. Coin replicas are very expensive. The books are few and expensive also. The shop has some really nice posters, but these are not displayed well, and it is hard to know that they exist or that they are in fact for sale. The shop itself has everything behind display cases. There are also other items for sale that are spread in other locations outside of the actual shop. These include books, stationary and puzzles. They should sell kitset models as they have models of ships on display in the museum. Dolls wearing traditional clothing would also be a good product. The ticket lady had to open the door and supervise

E-shop? No No

Customer behaviour None

Demographics of customers No

Size of shop small small

Prices expensive Medium. Some of the jewellery is very expensive, but looks of high quality

Categories of product coin replicas, artefact replicas, jewellery, posters, postcards, bookmarks, books, mugs Pencils, erasers, notebooks, few books (mainly in Greek),artefact replicas and jewellery, mugs, cups, plates, letter openers, puzzles, soldier figurines and various ornaments.

1 0

Staff

no's and position

Is Is the shop in an obvious location? No-at the exit and entrance yes - but the doors to the shop were closed. Not very inviting

Site/Museum Numismatic Museum National Historical Museum (Athens old Parliament building)

Public or private Public Public Private Public

Comments This is a poor shop with very limited variety of products. Poorly displayed. The shop uses local produce and items that relate to the local area, mainly centre around Charles Dickens (though there is a museum/Centre for this product elsewhere) Locally sourced products such as jewellery. They use band merchandiser for the tote ectbags because the wholesalers make too many. Use a small printers for pens, pencils. The products in the shop seemed completely irrelevant to what was actually in the museum. There were dinosaurs, minerals and romans yet they are not seen in the museum. Government organisations source the products.

E-shop? No No No No

Customer behaviour Not very interested in the products No one interested School children were curious

Demographics of customers Middle aged Middle aged Children

Size of shop small Mid Small Medium

Prices mid Cheap Cheap Cheap

Categories of product Postcards (very nice selection of old paintings), busts, books Conserves, confectionary, stationary, books specific to the area, toys Jewellery stationary, bags Dinosaur toys, rocks, roman toys, stationary

0 2 1 2

Staff

no's and position

Is Is the shop in an obvious location? Yes Yes No- by exit and entrance byYes- exit or entrance

Site/Museum Museum of the City of Athens Tourist Information Centre and Art Gallery, Rochester Huguenots Museums, Rochester Guildhall Museum, Rochester

Public or private Private Public Public

Comments Excellent products that were made in conjunction with the York Archaeological trust. Not many locally produced products, but they did come from the country Children were very interactive with the products such swords,as they very much showed an interest in buying them. Adults spent a good amount of time looking at the products Excellent products that are specially designed for the museum (cannot be found in the tourist shops) and link in with what is exhibited in the museum theAs museum is quite large there are several shops places around the museum, there are shops with higher end products and a book store. There is also a discount for the members of the British museum

E-shop? Yes Yes Yes

Customer behaviour Very interactive Customers bought presents for formal events here Lots of queues and people in the shop

Demographics of customers Adults interested in the handmade object, children in the stationary and cheap jewellery- visitors from all over the world Young Adults to middle aged Visitors from all over the world

Size of shop Large Large Large

Prices Cheap to mid- level Expensive Various prices

Categories of product Glasses, stationary, drinking horns, swords, dagger, jewellery postcards Toilet paper, stationary, sweets, books, novelty items such theas nodding dogs Rubber ducks, stationary, puzzles, sweets, bags, pens, replicas, soft toys

3 3

Staff

1 to 2

no's and position

Is Is the shop in an obvious location? byYes- the exit byYes- the exit and entrance byYes- several exits and entrances of different galleries

Site/Museum Jorvik Viking Centre, York Museum of London, London British Museum

Public or private Private

Comments A lot less traditional museum products, though a large variety, a lot like an Ikea store. Have products designed by Yoko Ono.

E-shop?

Customer behaviour

Demographics of customers Visitors from all over the world according to trip advisor (Trip Advisor, 2015)

Size of shop N/A

Prices Various prices

Categories of product Furniture, mugs, kitchen utensils, travel adaptors, stationary, posters, jewellery, watches, books, toys, seasonal gifts

N/A

Staff

no's and position

Is Is the shop in an obvious location? N/A

Museum of Modern Art (online shop only) Site/Museum Table 2 Benchmarking table

The museum shop at Kerameikos is initially non-existent to most visitors (As seen from the questionnaires). In order to establish the best practices for our heritage shop; national and international heritage sites have been benchmarked as this ‘identifies ways of operating more efficiently or effectively by incorporating the use of best practices exhibited by other organisations’ (Windle Moe, 2003: 1). The following procedures were taken: 1. Identify benchmarking partners: The benchmarking partners that were chosen are both private and public museums. 2. Establish a procedure for benchmarking (Windle Moe, 2003:5). The majority of these procedures are observational against Kerameikos’ own practices (Windle Moe, 2003:3). I. Visit Museums/Archaeological sites (Windle Moe, 2003:6). (With the case of MOMA only the online shop and website was visited). II. In the shop: Observe staff and customers. III. In the shop: Browse products; depending on the size of the shop, time in each should be between 10-30 mins IV. In the shop: Attempt to converse with staff and customers. V. Results are to be recorded in the benchmarking table. 3. Analyse the information found from the visit: So that ‘recommendations can be formulated that fit your organisation’ (Windle Moe, 2003:6), these recommendations need to be specific and measurable (Windle Moe, 2003:6) and will be formed at the end of this thesis in conjunction with other information collected.

Analysis Is the shop in an obvious/convenient location?

As seen from the literature review and the interviews to follow, the museum shop location is very important it is usually better to place the shop at the end of the visitor route rather than at the beginning. A visible museum ‘shop can often present a very attractive introduction to a museum and, at the same time, let passers-by know of the shop’s existence’ (Mottner, 2007: 8; 146 and Prescott, 2003: 2). The best locations for the museum shops are at the exits of the museum and were well signposted, such as in the Museum of London, Acropolis Museum, the Benaki Museum, British Museum and Viking Centre.

Chapter ten - Data and Statistics

The following data has been gathered from the Greek governmental organisation ELL-STAT. For 2015 there is only data available until July, the rest of the data represents the last three years at Kerameikos and the surrounding archaeological sites in Athens. Kerameikos has been compared in more detail with the Ancient Agora as mentioned previously as this is the most similar and nearest site to Kerameikos.

Visitation 2013-2014-2015 1,800,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 Acropolis Ancient Handrian's Dionysus Kerameikos Olympieion Roman Agora Library Theater Sgora

2013 2014 2015 till July

Chart 8- Visitation figures to archaeological sites in Athens City Centre

Revenues (€) 14,000,000 12,000,000

10,000,000 8,000,000

6,000,000 Axis Title Axis 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 Handria Dionysu Acropoli Ancient Keramei Olympio Roman n's s s Agora kos ion Agora Library Theater 2013 11,260,56 408,878 100,090 3,107,915 24,839 1,487,395 70,910 2014 11,870,57 632,642 230,793 3,668,706 38,889 1,807,613 115,050 2015 till July 7,180,944 462,368 133,606 1,992,449 24,296 1,231,233 54,413

Chart 9- Revenues (€) from archaeological sites in Athens City Centre

Visitation 2014

Acropolis Museum Acropolis Ancient Agora Handrian's Library Dionysus Theater Kerameikos Olympieion Roman Agora

1,563,434 1,377,409

622,000 399,106 448,351

79,456 86,435 68,586

Visitors 2014

Chart 10 -Visitation figures of 2014 to archaeological sites in Athens City Centre

The full year’s visitation for 2014 shows that Kerameikos comes 6th after the ancient Agora with a respectable difference in number of visitors. After Kerameikos, Hadrian’s Library and the Roman Agora follow with small a difference.

Visitation 2014 70,000

60,000

50,000

40,000 Visitors 30,000

20,000

10,000

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Ancient Agora 10,00 13,55 24,42 45,51 46,08 42,78 46,87 48,18 49,33 39,48 20,07 12,79 Kerameikos 2,022 6,817 6,542 7,077 6,118 8,388 9,645 10,60 10,66 12,75 2,581 3,213

Chart 11 Visitation figures and differences from 2014 of Kerameikos and Ancient Agora

Month by month comparison reveals respectable difference in visitation numbers between Ancient Agora and Kerameikos. The reason for this comparison is that the two sites are in the closest proximity (less than 1 kilometer distance) compared with other sites.

Visitation 2015 60,000

50,000

40,000

30,000 Visitors

20,000

10,000

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Ancient Agora 11,11 14,34 26,37 37,31 47,71 48,32 47,38 Kerameikos 2,306 2,379 3,196 3,977 4,376 3,623 3,560

Chart 12- Visitation figures and differences from 2015 of Kerameikos and Ancient Agora

The graph shows that the difference in visitation between the two sites is more obvious, as (comparing with visitation 2014 Ancient agora- Kerameikos) visitation of the former is increased but the latter is decreased.

Kerameikos Visitation 14,000

12,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Visitors 2013 Visitors 2014 Visitors 2015

Chart 13 -Kerameikos Visitation levels 2013-2015

As the graph reveals, comparing visitation of Kerameikos between 2013, 2014 and 2015, it is obvious that in 2015 Kerameikos has the lowest visitation even though the data is not complete (not yet published by Ell. Stat.).

Kerameikos Revenues 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

2013 2014 2015

Chart 14 -Kerameikos Revenues

Regardless of the low visitation that is apparent on the previous graph, the receipts appear to be high enough, yet in May there is a peak of almost 6000 euros. Nevertheless that peak is followed by a steady decrease in the following two months.

Projections

Table 3- Revenues/projections for 2013-2015

Year Visitors Revenues (€)

2013 68,312 24,839

2014 86,435 38,889

2015 23,500 24,300

2015 (annual 40,285 41,300 projection) 3

Table 4- Estimated projections for 2016

Scenario for the Projections of Projections of Percentage year 2016 visitors revenues (€)4 increase in revenues a) Decrease -50% 20,000 80,000 +100% b) Stable (same 40,000 160,000 +400% figures as 2015) ci) Increase +50% 60,000 240,000 +400% from 20155 cii) Increase +50% 68,000 100,000 +400% from 20136 ciii) Increase 50% 86,000 156,000 +400% from 20147 From the table of projections, it is clear that Kerameikos archaeological site is sustainable even with low visitation. Similar projections can be made for a new Kerameikos Heritage shop, since these visitors would hopefully also visit this shop. Furthermore the projected revenues made from the shop can be reinvested into the site, surrounding areas and the Heritage shop itself. This supports the feasibility, mission and vision of the shop.

3 These projections are based on the average of visitors/receipts per month, then this average is multiplied for the remainder of the five months of which data is missing. All numbers have been rounded. 4 These projection are based on the price rise of the new ticket, the increase is from 2€ to 8 in the year 2016 5 As this year appeared to be an anomaly in the date, three scenarios have been projected. The first is with no change in the revenue and visitors 6 As the number of visitors was higher in this year but the revenues were lower, the same pattern has been followed for the projection in 2016 if a similar thing should happen 7 Similar patterns were made in 2014 as from 2013, so this too again will be applied to 2016

Chapter eleven - Stakeholders

Stakeholder engagement is important and is part of the heritage shop’s mission. The stakeholders below have been identified as having some effect, interest or direct involvement in a heritage shop at Kerameikos. These have been split into the following categories:

 Internal  Connected  External

Internal Connected External Current Kerameikos staff, Product suppliers (artisans, Competitors (other customer service reps, TAP etc.) museums and archaeological archaeologists, conservators, sites, Artisans and souvenir guards etc. shops, TAP Consultants, architects, Government (Ministry of Museum Society builders Culture, local government) Professionals involved in the Association of Greek Society museum and archaeological Archaeologists site Shareholders Church of Greece Visitors Media Donors, funders Cultural Centres Partners Local communities

Table 5- List of immediate stakeholders

The following map and table shows a 500m radius around the archaeological site and identifies all of the stakeholders in the immediate vicinity (see appendix 11 for full list of stakeholders).

Table 6- List of different type of stakeholders

The next map and table shows all of the museums and main archaeological sites in central Athens which can be seen as both potential partners and direct competitors to the Kerameikos Heritage Shop.

The government bodies, contractors and donors will need to be approached in the planning stages of the proposed shop in order to understand the project’s feasibility and potential problems. Stakeholders such as visitors to the Kerameikos archaeological site, current staff, archaeologists and professionals involved in the site will be extremely helpful in contributing their ideas and solutions, especially regarding product design. Other stakeholder groups, like competitors, will be useful to benchmark for aspects that make them successful. These stakeholders also help form the PESTLE and SWOT analyses.

Chapter twelve- PESTLE Analysis

PESTLE is a ‘quick analysis of the external influences on a firm: the acronym stands for political, economic, social, technological, legal, and environmental, i.e. issues that could significantly affect the strategic development of a firm’ (Law, (b) 2009). With all the aforementioned research taken into consideration, the following indicates that a heritage shop in Kerameikos is feasible, as this analysis is of the current archaeological site museum and of the proposed heritage shop.

PESTLE CURRENT KERAMEIKOS ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROPOSED KERAMEIKOS ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE SHOP SITE HERITAGE SHOP

POLITICAL Museum shop products must be procured Since it would be advisable to not procure and approved by TAP. Due to political products from TAP, but engage with them on instability (Mount, 2015), there is a high a different level, this political factor should turnover of staff who are in senior level not be a great obstacle. However, the political positions for the site, including those at crisis is still current in Greece and shall effect TAP. opening a new heritage shop (Alderman, 2015).

ECONOMIC The current economic crisis has led to 50% Our shop will not be government run, so cuts cuts in the heritage sectors (For some from the government would not affect the heritage sites such as Knossos, it has lead shop as directly as if it were. However the them to legal problems (TVXS, 2015)). The economic crisis has not abated and will crisis will also lead to an increase in ticket continue to affect the shop in other ways prices, due to take place in 2016 (Dowson, (Alderman, 2015). T. 2015).

SOCIAL Due to the economic crisis, it would seem There has been a rise in visitors to Greece visitors may not to spend money at the every year. With this trend happening yearly, museum shops, but surprisingly this is not many more visitors are expected to visit and the case; as seen from above chapters, spend at the Kerameikos shop. there are actually more visitors and this has not stopped tourists spending.

TECHNOLOGICAL Many Greek museums and archaeological As stated electronic tickets are planned to be sites are not technologically advanced, made available, which may affect visitation to though this lack of technology has not the site. Since most museums in Greece are disadvantaged the site in any way. Due to not technologically advanced, it would be an the tax evasion by some sites, TAP will put idea to include more technological advances all receipts online (Archaiologia, 2015). in our shop to gain a competitive advantage. Electronic tickets are planned to be made However as stated from the questionnaires of available, in turn effecting entrance to the Kerameikos archaeological site shop, there is museum shop (Dowson, 2015) no demand for an E-shop.

LEGAL Kerameikos archaeological site museum In order to set up a heritage shop, one must shop must follow the same laws (See law work with the government in order to ensure framework) as other archaeological all stakeholders (as seen in the stakeholder museum shops. There are many laws to chapter) are appeased. take into account when concerned with Kerameikos.

ENVIRONMENTAL As mentioned in the brief history (Appendix In order to not compromise the 5), Kerameikos is an ecological site. This environmental factor of the site, it would be value of Kerameikos has attempted to wise to situate the heritage shop outside, but remain the same, including the museum near the site. shop which does not destroy the integrity of the site.

Table 7- PESTLE table for current and proposed shop

Chapter thirteen- Interview Summaries

(Please see appendix 7 for full interview transcripts)

(Please see appendix 8 for the full rapid ethnographic data)

Managers of European village- European Village, Kerameikos The European village does well in engaging their stakeholders in order to promote the values of the coffee shop and maintain the mission of their shop, which is knowledge exchange for the common good.

Nicholas Kontoprias, Director of Herakleidon Museum, Thissio Mr. Kontoprias states that promotion and positioning are important to keep the museum doors open. However, not much money has been made by the shop since visitation is low and is only opened accordingly. He further states that museum products should be thematic, of high quality and reasonably priced. Thematic products which relate to the exhibitions and educational products sell the best in museums. However, when selling products through different means Mr Kontoprias states that an E shop made little impact on sales in their museum shop. When dealing with pricing, the current economic situation can be beneficial when making deals with product stock. This can be advantageous for both the producers and sellers and focusses on timing and stock management. In addition to this, Mr. Kontoprias mentions that the staff must have basic sales skills, be friendly and presentable.

Aspasia Louvi – Head of TAP - TAP central office, Panepistimou. There is instability in the TAP organisation, since government run departments change regularly in Greece. Furthermore, in the department there is no one employed with knowledge of finance or accounting. The focus of TAP products is on replicas where Ms. Louvi states that there is a need to change in TAP and a demand placed on replicas since museums nowadays have become friendlier and in turn have higher visitation. She states that replicas must be exact because if they are not then they harm education. TAP runs a competition for designers to have the chance to sell their products in TAP shops. However this competition has been wrought with fraud and bribes since the winner also gets a cash prize. In order to tackle this problem, TAP is running a new competition which makes the designers collaborate with the Ephorates and other major stakeholders. The municipalities will be further involved in the process since they have recently been asked to submit papers in order for their heritage sites in the municipality to have products specifically related to

62 their sites. However, for some products each site will have their own name stamped upon something that can be mass produced for every site, such as bags. Ms. Louvi states that cooperation between public and private is difficult, but it can be made possible. She also mentions that there are plans for an E-shop.

When dealing with other museums TAP cannot give money to additional things such as educational programmes. The problem again lies in the economic situation. Furthermore, TAP is not allowed to take money from the Acropolis which coincidently makes the most money of all the sites/museums, but TAP does pay for all the Acropolis expenses such as staffing. In addition to this, much fraud has been committed by past employees of the department. Examples of this are to do with the money given to the government from TAP, some of which has gone missing and they are unsure where. Finally Ms. Louvi states that it is entirely possible to collaborate on buildings owned by the government with the Kerameikos Heritage shop. All these changes that Ms. Louvi wants to make are to be made soon before there is a government change.

Konstantinos – Shop staff and jeweller at the Folk Art Museum Shop- Monastiraki. The museum shop does not collaborate with TAP, but the museum itself is owned by the government. An organisation called the friends of the folk art museum run the shop. In deciding which products to sell, the designers approach the shop, but the designs are imagined by the museum’s exhibitions. (However as the museum is not open at the moment many customers do not understand the products).

Acropolis Museum The Acropolis museum’s gift shop considers their shop as an integral part of the museum. They established it based on a strategic marketing plan and it is run by the museum. It was developed by a small team of staff, but since then it has evolved considerably under the supervision of Board of the museum; their main stakeholder. The lay out of the shop, designed by the museum architect, is being reconsidered based on experiences with visitors and staff.

Their collaboration with the producers/designers is based on both approaching them and vice versa. They have an open invitation on their website, so the selection process comes from procedures similar to TAP. The products relate to price, quality, relevance, sales figures, trends and the “brand” identity of the museum on which their stock is also based. They consider the most successful products their high quality cast copies of artefacts.

Although there is no specific process to determine the success of the museum shop, they reinvest the revenues from the shop on purchasing of new stock and supporting the operations of the museum.

The museum shop extends the museum experience to visitors by providing them with museum inspired objects which enables them to take a reminder with them. Their future goal is to refine their plans and develop an E-shop.

Summary of Ethnographic Analysis of tourists From the analysis it is clear that Kerameikos is a peaceful, artistic site that clearly shows to the visitors that it once was the hub of daily life in ancient Greece, regardless of the site’s lack of information or signs. It is apparent from the data collected that many people want to see more reconstructions, artistic impressions and educational programmes within this site; these can be incorporated into the heritage shop. The surrounding area is seen as quiet but underutilised. Again this is something that our heritage shop can make use of. The natural and funerary aspect of the site is what some visitors draw comparisons to other archaeological sites from around the world. This can be emphasised and expanded on to differentiate the site from others. As many people see Kerameikos as intimate, engaging and informative, these atmospheres should try to be maintained within the shop.

However, the data has shown that many people wanted a café, a pottery workshop, and then a shop. But given that the data was collected at midday on a hot summer’s day, the visitors were looking for a place of rest, hence the reason why a café may have been the most popular answer. The majority of the participants were aged between 26-35, were educated with a Master’s degree or higher and from Europe with different occupations. The demographics of the people have not affected the results.

Summary of Greek questionnaires Before continuing the summary, it should be noted that the number of participants is very small (14 total), since most Greeks refused to answer the questionnaires; when the team opted to focus on Greeks visiting the area of Kerameikos, the number was even more disappointing. The research team observed that most locals passed along from the area of the site were heading to their jobs or their houses without interest to visit.

The data from the questionnaire shows that most have visited the site at least once and have captured changes in Kerameikos and in the wider region, especially those who were older and remember the old centre in relation to the current. Regarding the archaeological

64 site, they talk about positive changes, such as excavations and fencing. Many respondents consider the surrounding area abandoned and dirty contrasting the tourist’s opinions.

Trying to learn what values exist in the minds of the Greeks about Kerameikos, the result showed that it mainly symbolizes art and ceramics, similar to the tourists.

Visitors of Kerameikos find their experience at the archaeological site neutral with how they interacted with the place and how educational their walk/tour was. Surprisingly, respondents said that despite this, they found the site interesting. In the same question regarding their own thoughts, the result is a little different because the majority answered positively about their experience. Citizens seem to care for new actions inside and outside the archaeological site and proposed interesting ideas that could be implemented. At this point, the creation of a Heritage Shop holds third place, after the 3D reconstructions and educational programmes.

Many disadvantages of Kerameikos are the lack of signage and entrances for such a large archaeological site, reiterated by the tourists. When asked what would be different if the archaeological site was not there, the answers highlight the history of the site and its value as a natural open space. Most believe that Kerameikos helps to remember their history, who we are as Greeks, and prevents the centre from becoming an area full of apartment blocks and cement. It seems, therefore, that locals and tourists, more or less have the same thoughts about the site. This certifies that the results do not deviate. If all the above will be taken into consideration a heritage shop in the archaeological site of Kerameikos could help to solve some of the problems and to enhance services by operating in a supporting way next to the site.

Chapter Fourteen- Kerameikos Heritage shop questionnaire summary

This questionnaire was needed to see if there was a need for a new heritage shop in Kerameikos as from the previous research it shows that a new shop is feasible.

Participants: 101

1a. Did you notice the shop inside Kerameikos? Yes- 25%

No- 75%

Of the people who said ‘yes’, only three people bought something, mainly books and cards. Those who noticed the shop, but did not purchase anything, stated it was because there was not much choice and/or products were too expensive. The products in Kerameikos oppose market research from the previous questionnaire and interviews. This question was asked, firstly to identify whether visitors know of the shop inside Kerameikos. Secondly this was asked to see whether the shop sells products that customers would want to buy. The results indicate there is a need for better products and a better placement of the museum shop inside or outside the site.

2. Would you be interested in seeing locally sourced, handmade products in museum shops?

Only one person answered ‘no’ to this question, indicating that there is a definite need to have locally sourced handmade products. This question was asked to see if there was an interest in this type of product. The results correspond with our research and mission that people value uniqueness and locally sourced products unite the local community with the shop. The person who answered ‘no’ did not give a reason why they answered in this way.

3. What kind of locally sourced, handmade products would you be interested in buying?

Museum Products 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Museum Products

Chart 15- Questionnaire recipients preferred locally sourced products

This question was asked to see what type of products people would buy, the results are similar to the previous questionnaire. However, it does indicate that household objects, ceramics, jewellerly, books, textiles and replicas were the most popular.

4. For what purpose would you normally buy a heritage shop product?

Why buy gifts from the museum/archaeological site

shop?

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Chart 16- Questionnaire recipients’ reasons why they buy gifts from shops

This question was asked in order to identify what entices people to buy from a museum shop. As mentioned earlier, uniqueness is a factor for why people buy from museum shops. Other reasons why people buy from these shops are for memories of the trip and memories of the site.

5. Would you be interested in shopping online from a Kerameikos heritage shop?

In favour of an online shop

Yes No

Chart 17- Questionnaire recipients in favour of an E-shop

The reasons why people answered ‘No’ is that they would not want to buy products from a site that have not visited yet. However those that answered ‘yes’ said the online shop would be for convenience. This question was asked to see whether there needed to be an online presence for Kerameikos; however an online website would suffice initially. An E shop would probably be unnecessary for a small sized shop.

Demographics

The majority of people who answered this questionnaire were between the ages of 26-35, female and Greek, who have worked in the heritage sector, and are students. However, like the other questionnaire, participants who worked in this sector did not affect the results of this questionnaire. The above research gives indication of the buyer power within Kerameikos and will impact the porter five forces analysis.

Chapter fifteen - Porters Five Forces

Figure 5- Porter five forces Source: Porters, 2008: 80

Porter’s five forces is used to determine ‘the balance of power within a particular industry and hence its overall profitability. The frame identifies five forces in the microenvironment that drive competition and threaten a firm's ability to make profits’ (Law, (a) 2009). The five

69 forces are threat of New Entrants8 Rivalry among existing Competitors9, Bargaining Power of Suppliers10, Threat of Substitute products or services11 and Bargaining Power of Buyers12.The above chart analyses these forces on the level of threat towards both the current museum shop at Kerameikos and the one proposed. However, it appears the majority of threats to the new proposed heritage shop and the current site are low to mid-level. Therefore, because the microenvironment is a low threat, and in conjunction with the rest of the research presented, a new heritage shop is feasible in the area of Kerameikos.

8 This looks at the’ new capacity and a desire to gain market share, it puts pressure on prices, costs and rate of investment. (Porter, 2008: 81)

9 can take a familiar form; discounting new products introduction to advertising and service improvements’ (Porter, 2008: 85)

10 Analyses the value for the supplier by charging higher prices (Porter, 2008: 82) 11 this threat ‘can either be downstream or direct’ (Porter, 2008: 84), both have a high level threat of entry into the industry 12 analyses whether the buyer can ‘capture more value by forcing down the prices and demanding better quality or more services’ (Porter, 2008: 83)

Chapter sixteen- Kerameikos SWOT Analysis

This more in depth SWOT analysis is for the current Kerameikos archaeological site shop. The table below shows what needs to be done in order to tackle the weaknesses and threats of the current site. The best way to do this is to establish a new heritage shop, which is feasible and necessary as is proven with the rest of the research established.

EXTERNAL STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

1 Company/product The books stored in Expensive To expand on the Similar products reputation the shop cannot be products and the current products that can be sold at found physically museum shop is are unique to the the anywhere else. not generally site. archaeological noticed by sites/souvenir visitors. shops close by.

2 Market share Close to public Athens is overrun Kerameikos is a Other transport and the with tourist shops unique ecological archaeological site is part of the that can stock site in the centre of sites in the area, group ticket for all products related Athens, this theme which are more archaeological sites to Kerameikos can be expanded popular. in central Athens. (i.e. replicas). upon.

3 Product's ability to As seen from the Not enough range Can expand on the New shops may meet market needs questionnaires, the of products at products in the shop, open up around products do not varying prices. with new and unique the site. meet market needs. ideas.

4 Product's ability to Products do not There are no The shop can have Lack of customer meet market trends meet market product changes seasonal products interest, they trends. throughout the that relate to spend their year. Kerameikos history. money elsewhere.

5 Value product brings to Some of the The products are Can expand on the There are more the market products are great expensive. value of the product, valuable items value for those that both in price and in sold elsewhere. cannot find quality. E.g. The products such as Acropolis the physical books museum. relating to the site elsewhere.

6 Product Quality Some products are As there are no Can stock a variation Items sold at of good academic labels to the of product with other sites and quality products, this is different quality. museum are of

hard to determine better quality.

7 Customer service and Staff are friendly Staff do not know Can train staff in Lack of interest support quality and welcoming to much about the better ways. in products from the site. products. the staff. There is no specific website or contact number for the shop.

8 Quality/effectiveness There has been no There has been A new marketing Lack of of past marketing past or present no past or present plan, seen in the stakeholder marketing of the marketing of the marketing chapter involvement. products. products. can be implemented.

9 Pricing The books might be The products are Can have a variation Other the cheapest expensive. of product and competitors physical copies. prices. stock similar products at better prices.

10 Geographic location Located in central Bad signposting. There are three Visitors may go Athens. entrances which elsewhere in should be used, the Athens. signposting can be clearer.

INTERNAL STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

1. Financial strength Entrance is cheap Lack financial A better museum The current revenue shop can give financial Economic crisis success to the museum and archaeological site

2. Manufacturing Already has large Products are Locally source the Opposition of capabilities quantities of commissioned products to engage stakeholders products. by TAPA. stakeholders

3. Responsiveness of Staff are friendly Lack of Can be trained to Political and workforce and willing to help knowledge tackle problems Economic instability about shop products

Table 8- Strengths and weaknesses of Kerameikos heritage shop Source: Kotler, 1998: 70-71 72

Chapter seventeen -Marketing Mix

As stated previously, to create a good heritage shop ‘there is a need for a good marketing strategy in order to enhance the museum experience’ (Mottner, 2007:141). Kerameikos is a perfect case study for the ‘old style’ museum shops, where ‘the shop used to be seen as a minor source of revenue and a convenience for visitors, but had little importance in the overall life of the museum’ (Mottner, 2007:141). ‘It is highly important for a museum to have a shop, not only for financial benefit but also for the benefit of the customers overall experience of the museum shop. Museum shops can also result in major revenues’ (Mottner, 2007:141). The mission of the Kerameikos heritage shop (the three E’s) need to be considered in conjunction with a marketing strategy which follows the seven p’s (Mottner, 2007:142). The strategy consists of the following:

Product

The products are key to marketing strategies (Mottner, 2007:142). This means that strategy will determine what the shop will stock and sell. Market research determines what products customers want in the shop and what they will buy. From the results of the questionnaires about Kerameikos and heritage shops, it is clear that customers like to buy stationary, bags, ceramics, jewellery, postcards, mugs, replicas, posters, educational toys and calendars. Therefore these are the products of which Kerameikos should focus on selling. These products must relate to the mission (Mottner, 2007:143 and Wallace, 2006: 83) ‘explore, educate and engage’. Furthermore, products should also adjust to seasonal changes (Mottner, 2007:143) and other external factors as ‘market profiles, seasonal visitation patterns, perceptions, and preferences for different collections and special exhibitions’(Mottner, 2007:143) can determine what type of customers visit museum shops, what they buy and when they visit the shops. Another way to determine what products should be sold is through ‘a good POS (point of sale) and forecasting future product needs’ (Mottner, 2009:143); doing this can allow for a more cost effective heritage shop and satisfied customers.

Below is a table, which shows product development and the process, with examples of potential products for the Kerameikos heritage shop.

PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS EXAMPLE OPTION

NO ADAPTION NEEDED Products that relate to the Book about museum’s museum’s collection are collection such as the bought from Kerameikos books that manufacturers. are already sold. (Fig. 11 and 12).

MANUFACTURERS PRODUCT A manufacturer develops Miniature replicas of DEVELOPMENT a product that relates to grave stele or pottery the museum’s collection that is found in the site. but they also sell it on the open market.

INTERPRETATION An element from the Ancient artefacts found heritage site is used to on the site develop product that is reinvented/adapted as a interpreted in a different coffee cup as coffee cups, way. (please see appendix 13 for an example product).

ADAPTION An item in the collection is Cooking cauldrons found reproduced with an in the site, adapted for adaption for colour, size modern day use, using or fabrication. more sustainable materials.

REPRODUCTION An item in the collection is Ceramic dolls made for reproduced often using children. the same processes used to make the original.

Table 9- Product development, processes and examples Source: Theobald, 200:65-66

The products that are stocked in the shop will have information labels attached to them to educate visitors about the products; this relates to the mission of the heritage shop.

Products need to be continually reinvented and adapted because ‘visitors generally value uniqueness’ (Mottner, 2007:144). Therefore it is recommended the table above is reviewed, added and adapted seasonally.

Price

Figure 7 - Book ‘KERAMEIKOS’ sold at Kerameikos Archaeological site shop. Source: Vasia Terzi

Figure 6- Book ‘The River Eridanos of Ancient Athens’ sold at Kerameikos Archaeological site Shop Source: Anastasia Pouliou

As seen in the research, most people spend between 5-10 euros each time they visit a museum shop, however most museum retailers use a cost based method of pricing as opposed to a demand based method (Mottner, 2009:145). Cost based is finding the floor and ceiling prices, these ‘are the minimum and maximum prices for a specific product or service; they serve as a price range, however a company should price somewhere in between the floor and the ceiling’ (Rawes, E.M. 2015) as this is used for bulk production.

However, for Kerameikos it would be advisable to use the demand based method as there are no bulk productions.

Promotion

A vital element that is needed for the museum shop is the promotion of the museum store. This is ‘best achieved through an integrated marketing communications strategy where a number of promotional tools are used synergistically’ (Mottner, 2007:145). These promotional tools have two objectives; to achieve financial and educational success (Mottner, 2007:145). Usually the most effective means of promoting the museum store is word of mouth (Mottner, 2007:146), though in the present climate an online word of mouth promotion through sites such as trip advisor and social media can be a more effective method. The best promotional tool is a branding campaign (Appendix 12) for Kerameikos heritage shop.

Place

The placement of the museum shop is of upmost importance, it is said that ‘stores that are next to the museum’s exit are the most financially successful’ (Wallace, 2006: 81). Therefore with Kerameikos in mind, it would be beneficial to have the heritage shop near the exit of the site. (Please see appendix 10 for a list of proposed locations).

People

People in all areas of business need to be trained (Mottner, 2007:147); this is no exception with Kerameikos. However, ‘the professional museum store manager needs to have a strong understanding of retailing as well as an understanding and deep appreciation of the museum and its collection’ (Mottner, 2007:147). This is vital as staff will not benefit the site or shop in any way having a manager without knowledge of the site (See appendix 3 for HR).

Physical Evidence

As mentioned earlier ‘a visit to a museum is an intangible experience’ (Mottner, 2007:147), the products of the heritage shop make the experience tangible and visitors form memories of their experience through all their senses (Mottner, 2007:147) . Therefore the museum shop needs to accommodate this feature of the site within the shop. For example Kerameikos should keep the serene and calm nature of the site consistent.

Process

Processes for the museum can include how people make their way around the shop and handling lines and crowds, which result in fewer unhappy visitors to the store (Mottner, 2007:148). However, since the Kerameikos museum will be small, this process may not be needed, though it should be kept in mind during busy periods for the museum, such as holiday seasons. (For an evaluation criteria for of the heritage shop performance please see appendix 9)

Following these 7p’s of marketing will ensure the feasibility and ongoing success of a Kerameikos heritage shop.

Chapter eighteen- Concluding

Recommendations

From the literature review it seems that museums have changed substantially over the past two centuries. Therefore, the recommendation would be to redefine museums, souvenir and gift shops as heritage shops; according to the ‘new era’ of shops within heritage sites and incorporate this within Greece.

Shops within heritage sites are nowadays an extension of the heritage experience, as well as being a financial asset. By means of Kerameikos’ mission ‘explore, educate and engage’; our heritage shop should embody this new extended experience by primarily focusing its attention on the educational values and engagement of its stakeholders. The research shown in this paper displays that we may retain the aforementioned criteria of the heritage site through the means of a consumerist heritage shop.

The recommendations from the current analysis show that in the unstable political and economic climate currently in Greece, heritage shops should be privately run due to governmental issues seen in the law section, the interview section with Aspasia Louvi (Head of TAP), PESTLE analysis, SWOT and the Benchmarking section. Though, in order to engage the stakeholders, the heritage shop should be run in conjunction with the government.

The questionnaires given in the paper in combination with the SWOT analysis shows that people do visit and buy products from heritage shops. However, these shops need to be stocked with good quality, unique products with great themes relating to the museum. The products must not be too expensive otherwise people will refrain from purchasing them. Furthermore, the questionnaires and the benchmarking correlate well with each other in that the best shops seen from the benchmarking such as the Acropolis Museum, Benaki, British Museum, MOMA and Museum of London, stock their products in the price range that people would most likely buy.

Ticket price rises and projections estimated in this thesis show that the heritage shop at Kerameikos would be sustainable, although Kerameikos is the least visited archaeological site in Athens, there has been a rise in overall visitors to Greece, so it is recommended that something like a heritage shop would entice visitors to the site. The heritage shop of

Kerameikos would be an asset for the site, not only in terms of revenues, but in visitation and educational engagement of Greek heritage.

The heritage shop must be well signposted, as near to the site entrance and exit as possible and larger than the current shop with a maximum of two staff. The shop products should be general (e.g. stationary, cards, calendars etc.), but other must be unique, value oriented, educational and locally sourced. The products should be priced according to the local economy and the product quality. Products in the museum shop need to appeal to all audiences in order to engage with stakeholders. The Kerameikos heritage shop needs products that people can actively engage with. Following the questionnaire results and marketing section the shop should stock the following items: stationary, bags, ceramics, jewellery, postcards, mugs, replicas, posters, educational toys and calendars. However these items must be in conjunction with the museums mission and should be able to adapt and be reinvented accordingly. The staff at the museum shop must be highly trained, not only in customer service but also in knowledge of the site. The museum shop decor must reflect what the site offers, a calm and tranquil environment, displaying the ecological characteristics of the site.

As Greece is in an ever-changing environment, it would be recommended to establish the shop as a well structure and transparent organisation in order to be flexible, adaptable, and open to new ideas, allowing rapid decisions to be made, if necessary. This cannot be implemented efficiently through the public sector due to restrictive bureaucratic procedures, seen from the interviews and lack of expertise as shown in the law sector. Therefore, not only the Kerameikos heritage shop, but others shops in Greece should cooperate with the government; and even more so when more beneficial and less restricting changes are implemented within the government.

Overall the Kerameikos heritage shop can be the catalyst for the new era of heritage shops. It can be a prime example of a shop to other heritage sites by being an extension of the site in an aesthetic and atmospheric way and strive to be an embodiment of the Kerameikos archaeological shop’s mission “explore, educate and engage.”

Bibliography

Alderman, L et Al. (2015). Greece’s Debt Crisis Explained. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/business/international/greece-debt-crisis- euro.html?_r=0. [Accessed 17 November 15].

Ambrose, T. and C. Paine. (2006). Museum Basics. 2nd ed. Routledge, London and New York.

Archaeological Receipts Fund (2015) Available at: http://www.tap.gr/tapadb/index.php (Accessed: 24 November 2015).

Archaiologia. (2015). Ψηφιακή βιβλιοθήκη ετοιμάζει το ΤΑΠ. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.archaiologia.gr/2015/10/29/ψηφιακή-βιβλιοθήκη-ετοιμάζει-το-ταπ/ [Accessed 02 November 15].

Banou, E and Bournas, E. (2014). ΚΕΡΑΜΕΙΚΟΣ Olkos Athens.

BIOME, 2012 Σωματείο εργατοϋπαλλήλων στη Βιομηχανική Μεταλλευτική (2012) Available at: http://biom-metal.blogspot.gr/ [Accessed 26 November 2015].

Bonet, L. and Donato, F. (2011). ‘4 The Financial Crisis and its Impact on the Current Models of Governance and Management of the Cultural Sector in Europe’, ENCATC JOURNAL OF CULTURAL MANAGEMENT AND POLICY.

Buber, R. and M. Knassmuller. (2009). ‘Approaching Museum Shop Marketing from a Strategic Perspective.’ in Anzmac. Sydney, Australia.

Burtenshaw, P. (2014). ‘Mind the Gap: Cultural and Economic Values in Archaeology.’ in Public Archaeology 13.1-3 Routledge, London. 48-58.

Caldwell, N. G. (2000). ‘The Emergence of Museum Brands.’ International Journal of Arts Management 2.3. 28-34.

Cameron, C. (2014). ICCROM Conserving the authentic Essays in honor of Jukka Jokilehto. ed Stanley-Price and King ICCROM, Rome. 127-136.

Coben, L. S. (2014). ‘Sustainable Preservation: Creating Entrepreneurs, Opportunities, and Measurable Results.’ In Public Archaeology 13.1-3 Routledge, London. 278-287.

Collins, J and Porras, J. (1996). ‘Building Your Company’s Vision’ in Harvard Business Review September-October, Massachusetts. 65-77.

Curbed. (2015). How are Austerity Measures Harming Architectural and Archaeological Preservation in Greece?. [ONLINE] Available at: http://curbed.com/archives/2015/07/31/greek-cultural-heritage-austerity-cuts.php. [Accessed 01 October 15].

Denyer, S (2011). Retrospective statements of OUV for World heritage properties: Authenticity and Integrity. ICCOMOS Paris, France.

Dictionary.com (2015). ‘Ceramics’ [ONLINE] Available at: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ceramics [Accessed on 01 October 15].

Dowson,T. (2015). Ticket Tips for the Acropolis and Other Ancient Sites in Athens. [ONLINE] Available at: http://archaeology-travel.com/travel-tips/buying-tickets-for-the-acropolis-and- other-ancient-sites-in-athens/. [Accessed 17 November 15].

Doyle, C. (2011). ‘Marketing plan’ in An Oxford Dictionary of Marketing 3rd edition. Oxford University Press. Oxford.

Ell.Stat, 2014. Ελληνική Στατιστική Αρχή (2014). Κίνηση μουσείων και αρχαιλογικών χώρων Δεκέμβριος 2014. Athens, Greece.

Ell.Stat, 2015. Ελληνική Στατιστική Αρχή (2015). Κίνηση μουσείων και αρχαιλογικών χώρων Ιουνιος 2015. Athens, Greece.

European Village. (2015). European Village. [ONLINE] Available at: http://european- village.org/. [Accessed 02 December 15].

Ferrero, A. (2005). ‘Money Over Matter: Heritage Management in Wales.’ In Public Archaeology 4 Routledge, London. 243-256.

Filippopoulou, 2015. Φιλιπποπούλου, Έ. (2015). Γιατί ο πολιτισμός δεν παράγει υψηλά έσοδα;. Available at: http://www.kathimerini.gr/826507/article/epikairothta/ellada/giati-o- politismos-den-paragei-yyhla-esoda [Accessed 29 November 2015].

Foley, M and McPherson, G. (2000) ‘Museums as Leisure’ in International Journal of Heritage Studies 6. 2 Routledge, London. 161- 174.

Goette, H. R (2001) Athens, Attica and the Megarid: An Archaeological Guide Revised, English edition. Routledge. Oxford.

Hede, A. M. (2007). ‘Branding Museums in the Global Marketplace.’ In Museum Marketing. Competing in the Global Marketplace, edited by R. Rentschler and A. M. Hede, Elsevier ltd. Oxford: 151-159.

Keller, ML. (2009). The Ritual Path of Initiation into the Eleusinian mysteries. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.ciis.edu/Documents/07_keller.pdf. [Accessed 05 November 15].

Kent, T. (2010). ‘The Role of the Shop in Extending the Visitor Experience.’in International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing 15, Wiley, New Jersey, USA. 67-77.

Kotler et al. (1998) Museum and Marketing Strategy 2nd edition. San Francisco CA.

Kotler, N. and P. Kotler. (1999). ‘Can Museums be all Things to all People?: Missions, Goals, and Marketing's Role.’ In Museum Management and Curatorship 18.3, Routledge, London. 271-287.

Kovach, D. S. (2014). ‘Developing the Museum Experience: Retailing in American Museums 1945-91.’ In Museum History Journal 7.1, Maney Publishing, Philadelphia, USA. 103-121.

Law, J (a) (2009) ‘PESTLE’ in A Dictionary of Business and Management (5 ed.), Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Law, J (b) (2009) ‘Porter’s Five Forces’ in A Dictionary of Business and Management (5 ed.), Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Lialios, 2015. Λιάλιος, Γ. (2015). Αρχαιολογικό, αλυσιδωτές οι εκπλήξεις, του Γιώργου Λιάλιου. Available at: http://www.kathimerini.gr/798530/article/epikairothta/ellada/arxaiologiko-alysidwtes-oi- ekplh3eis [Accessed 29 November 2015].

LIFO. (2015). Ο Κεραμεικός γίνεται αφορμή για τη συνεργασία Ελλήνων και Γάλλων καλλιτεχνών Πηγή: [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.lifo.gr/guide/culturenews/arts/79505. [Accessed 05 November 15].

Link, T. (2006). ‘Models of Sustainability. Museums, Citizenship, and Common Wealth.’ Museums and Social Issues 1.2, Maney Publishing, Philadelphia, USA. 173-190.

Living in Greece. (2007). Lethal air pollution in Athens. [ONLINE] Available at: http://livingingreece.gr/2007/03/19/lethal-air-pollution-in-athens/. [Accessed 05 November 15].

Lockstone, L. (2007). ‘Major Case Study: Shape Shifters – The Role and Function of Modern Museums.’ In Museum Marketing. Competing in the Global Marketplace, edited by R. Rentschler and A. M. Hede, Elsevier ltd, Oxford. 61-68.

Lovelock, C. H. and C. B. Weinberg. (1988). Public and Nonprofit Marketing. The Scientific Press Series. 2nd ed. Danvers: Boyd and Fraser, New Jersey, USA.

Macdonald, S. (2012). ‘The Shop: Multiple Economies of Things in Museums.’ In Museum X: Zur Neuvermessung Eines Mehrdimensionalen Raumes, edited by F. Von Bose, K. Poehls, F. Schneider and A. Schulze, Berlin: Panama Verlag. 42-45.

Macleod, L (2012). ‘Making SMART goals smarter’ in Physician executive 38:2 U.S National Library of Medicine, Maryland. 68 -72.

Markou, 2015. Μάρκου, Ε. (2015). Αυξήσεις στα εισιτήρια μουσείων και αρχαιολογικών χώρων. Available at: http://www.archaiologia.gr/blog/2015/10/15/%CE%B1%CF%85%CE%BE%CE%AE%CF%83%C E%B5%CE%B9%CF%82-%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B1- %CE%B5%CE%B9%CF%83%CE%B9%CF%84%CE%AE%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%B1- %CE%BC%CE%BF%CF%85%CF%83%CE%B5%CE%AF%CF%89%CE%BD- %CE%BA%CE%B1%CE%B9-%CE%B1/ [Accessed 29 November 2015].

Mavromatis, S. (2013). Global financial crisis: Culture’s Achilles heel. Available at: http://www.greekcultureprotection.com/ [Accessed 29 November 2015].

McIntyre, C. (2010). ‘Designing Museum and Gallery Shops as Integral, Co-Creative Retail Spaces within the overall Visitor Experience.’ Museum Management and Curatorship 25.2, Routledge, London. 181-198.

McLean, F. (1997). Marketing the Museum. Routledge, London.

McPherson, G. (2007). ‘Public Memories and Private Tastes: The Shifting Definitions of Museums and their Visitors in the UK.’ In Museum Management and Curatorship 21.1 Routledge, London. 44-57.

Merchant, A. and G. M. Rose. (2013). "Effects of Advertising-Evoked Vicarious Nostalgia on Brand Heritage." Journal of Business Research 66 Massachusetts, USA. 2619-2625.

Ministry of Culture (a). (2015). Museums. [ONLINE] Available at: http://odysseus.culture.gr/h/1/eh10.jsp. [Accessed 27 November 15].

Ministry of Culture (b). (2015). Monuments. [ONLINE] Available at: http://odysseus.culture.gr/h/2/eh20.jsp. [Accessed 27 November 15].

Ministry of Culture (c). (2015). Archaeological Sites. [ONLINE] Available at: http://odysseus.culture.gr/h/3/eh30.jsp. [Accessed 27 November 15].

Mottner, S. (2007). ‘Retailing and the Museum: Applying the Seven 'P's of Services Marketing to Museum Stores.’ In Museum Marketing. Competing in the Global Marketplace, edited by R. Rentschler and A. M. Hede, Elsevier ltd, Oxford. 141-149.

Mottner, S. (2009) ‘Retailing and the museum: applying the seven P’s of services marketing to museum stores’ edited by R. Rentschler, et al. in Museum Marketing. Oxford.

Mottner, S. and J. B. Ford. (2005). ‘Measuring Nonprofit Marketing Strategy Performance: The Case of Museum Stores.’ Journal of Business Research 58, Massachusetts, USA. 829-840.

Mount, H, (2015). Look back, mighty Odysseus, and despair. The Sunday Times, 12 July. http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/newsreview/features/article1579744.ece. [Accessed 02 November 15].

Museum Association. (2014). Cuts Survey 2014. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.museumsassociation.org/download?id=1123548. [Accessed 01 October 15].

Naftemporiki (2015) Οι Έλληνες πιστεύουν ότι η επένδυση στον πολιτισμό μπορεί να βοηθήσει στην έξοδο από την κρίση. Available at: http://www.naftemporiki.gr/story/1024876/oi-ellines-pisteuoun-oti-i-ependusi-ston- politismo-mporei-na-boithisei-stin-eksodo-apo-tin-krisi [Accessed 27 November 2015].

Naftemporiki (2015). ΚΑΣ: Δεκαεπτά νέα ενιαία εισιτήρια σε αρχαιολογικούς χώρους και Μουσεία. Available at: http://www.naftemporiki.gr/story/1022891/kas-dekaepta-nea- eniaia-eisitiria-se-arxaiologikous-xorous-kai-mouseia#null (Accessed: 29 November 2015).

National Museum Directors' Conference. (2009). Museums Deliver. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.nationalmuseums.org.uk/media/documents/what_we_do_documents/museu ms_deliver_full.pdf. [Accessed 01 October 15].

National Trust for Historic Preservation. (2015). Heritage Tourism. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.preservationnation.org/information-center/economics-of- revitalization/heritage-tourism/. [Accessed 01 October 15].

Neville, S. (2013). The Guardian: Museum shops cash in with sales reaching a record £100m a year. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2013/apr/06/museum- shops-cash-in. [Accessed 27 September 15].

Platia, N. (2015). Greece’s economic crisis and its impact on the country’s cultural heritage. Available at: http://www.gounesco.com/greece-economic-crisis-cultural-heritage-impact/ [Accessed 29 November 2015].

Porter, M (2008) ‘The Five Competitive forces that shape strategy’ In Harvard Business Review, Harvard University press, Massachusetts, USA. 79-93.

Prescott, J. (2003) Retail Guidelines for Small Museums.: Association of independent museums. Bristol, UK.

Price, F. H. (2013). ‘Florida's Underwater Archaeological Preserves: Public Participation as an Approach to Submerged Heritage Management.’ Public Archaeology 12.4, Routledge, London. 221-241.

Protothema (2015). Αυξάνονται οι τιμές σε αρχαιολογικούς χώρους και μουσεία. Available at: http://www.protothema.gr/culture/article/517782/auxanodai-oi-times-se- arhaiologikous-horous-kai-mouseia/ [Accessed 29 November 2015].

Protothema. (2015). Ο ΝΕΟΝ παρουσιάζει τη καλλιτέχνιδα Μαρία Λοϊζίδου στον Κεραμεικό. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.protothema.gr/culture/article/504706/o-neon- parousiazei-ti-kallitehnida-maria-loizidou-ston-kerameiko/. [Accessed 05 November 15].

Rawes, E.M. (2015). The Differences Between Value-Based Pricing & Cost-Based Pricing. [ONLINE] Available at: http://smallbusiness.chron.com/differences-between-valuebased- pricing-costbased-pricing-23095.html. [Accessed 25 September 15].

Rentschler, R. (2007). ‘Museum Marketing: No Longer a Dirty Word.’ In Museum Marketing. Competing in the Global Marketplace, edited by R. Rentschler and A. M. Hede, Elsevier Ltd, Oxford. 12-20.

Rigopoulos, 2015. Ρηγόπουλος, Δ. (2015). Ο Μινώταυρος της φοροδιαφυγής. Available at: http://www.kathimerini.gr/826718/opinion/epikairothta/politikh/o-minwtayros-ths- forodiafyghs [Accessed 30 November 2015].

Romeo, N. (2015). Strapped for cash, some Greeks turn to ancient source of wealth. Available at: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/08/150817-greece-looting-artifacts-financial- crisis-archaeology/ [Accessed 29 November 2015].

Romeo, N. (2015). Strapped for Cash, Some Greeks Turn to Ancient Source of Wealth. [ONLINE] Available at: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/08/150817-greece- looting-artifacts-financial-crisis-archaeology/. [Accessed 27 November 15].

Rottenberg, BL (2002). ‘Museums, Information and the Public Sphere’ In Museum International, 54.4, 21–28.

Simpson, J. a (1989). ‘Heritage’ in Oxford English Dictionary (OED). Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Simpson, J. b (1989). ‘Shop’ in Oxford English Dictionary (OED). Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Slater, A. (2007). 'Constructive Chillers': A New Market for Museums. In: Rentschler, R., Hede, A.M. (Eds.), Museum Marketing. Competing in the Global Marketplace. Butterworth Heinemann, Amsterdam et al. 91-103.

Smith, L (2006). Uses of Heritage New Edition. Routledge, London.

Stebbins, R. A. (1996). ‘Cultural Tourism as Serious Leisure.’ In Annals of Tourism Research 23 945-948.

Stroulia, A. and S. B. Sutton. (2009). ‘Archaeological Sites and Local Places: Connecting the Dots.’ Public Archaeology: Archaeological Ethnographies 8.2-3, Routledge, London. 124-140.

TAP. 2015. TAP. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.tap.gr/tapadb/index.php/en/. [Accessed 28 November 15].

The British Museum. (2013). Reports and Accounts for the Year Ended March 2013. The stationary office Ltd.London.

Theobald, M. (1992). ‘The Education Connection. Are we Fooling Ourselves?’ History News, 47.5. 6-11.

Theobald, M. (2000). Museum Store Management. 2nd ed.: AltaMira press, Oxford.

Thermou, 2012. Θερμού, Μ. (2012). Κλοπές αρχαιοτήτων κατά συρροήν στην Ελλάδα. Available at: http://www.tovima.gr/culture/article/?aid=485974 [Accessed 29 November 2015].

Thomas, S. and C. Kohli. (2009). ‘A Brand is Forever! A Framework for Revitalizing Declining and Dead Brands.’ in Business Horizons, 52. 377-386.

Thucydides, (1910) History of the Peloponnesian War, Dent, J.M London.

Timothy, D. J. (2014). ‘Contemporary Cultural Heritage and Tourism: Development Issues and Emerging Trends.’ in Public Archaeology 13.1-3 Routledge, London. 30-47.

Toepler, S. and V. Kirchberg. (2007). ‘Museums and Merchandising.’ In Museum Marketing. Competing in the Global Marketplace, edited by R. Rentschler and A. M. Hede. Elsevier ltd, Oxford. 161-168

TVXS. (2015). Αποκλειστικό: Το υπουργείο Πολιτισμού... κλέβει την Εφορία! Τι άλλο;.... [ONLINE] Available at: http://tvxs.gr/news/ellada/apokleistiko-ypoyrgeio-politismoy-klebei- tin-eforia. [Accessed 02 November 15].

UNESCO. (2005). The Criteria for Selection. [ONLINE] Available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/criteria/. [Accessed 05 November 15].

University of Massachusetts. (2015). What is Heritage? [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.umass.edu/chs/about/whatisheritage.html. [Accessed 07 November 15].

Wallace, A. (2006). Museum Branding: How to Create and Maintain Image, Loyalty, and Support. Oxford.

Wills, G (1992). Lincoln at Gettysburg: The Words that Remade America Simon & Schuster New York.

Windle Moe, B. (2003). ‘Process Benchmarking for Museums.‘ in History News 58. 1. 1-8

Αρχαία Μεσσήνη (no date) Available at: http://www.ancientmessene.gr/site/contact.php [Accessed: 26 November 2015].

Γραφειοκρατία, νόμος και χρόνος, Νικος Γ. Ξυδακης (2012) Available at: http://www.kathimerini.gr/505128/article/politismos/arxeio-politismoy/grafeiokratia- nomos-kai-xronos [Accessed 26 November 2015].

Ένωση Φίλων Ακροπόλεως (1988) Available at: http://www.acropolisfriends.gr/ [Accessed 27 November 2015].

Εφημερίς της Κυβερνήσεως της Ελληνικής Δημοκρατίας (1977) N.736 Περί Οργανισμού Ταμείου Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων. Law 736/1977

Εφημερίς της Κυβερνήσεως της Ελληνικής Δημοκρατίας (1980) Ν. 1064 Περί κυρώσεως της από 31 Μαρτίου 1980 Πράξεως Νομοθετικού Περιεχομένου του Προέδρου της Δημοκρατίας "περί τηρητέας διαδικασίας δια την παραγωγήν και πώλησην υπό τρίτων πάσης φύσεως εκμαγείων, αντιγράφων, απομιμημάτων κλπ παντός έργο, αποτελούντος . Law 1064/1980

Εφημερίς της Κυβερνήσεως της Ελληνικής Δημοκρατίας (1997) N. 2557 Θεσμοί, μέτρα και δράσεις πολιτιστικής ανάπτυξης. Law 2557/1997

Εφημερίς της Κυβερνήσεως της Ελληνικής Δημοκρατίας (2002) Ν. 3028 Για την Προστασία των Αρχαιοτήτων και εν γένει της Πολιτιστικής Κληρονομιάς. Law 3028/2002

Εφημερίς της Κυβερνήσεως της Ελληνικής Δημοκρατίας (2005) Υπουργική Απόφαση Αρ. Φύλλου 1417 Ακολουθητέα Διαδικασία για τη διάθεση πωλητέων επί παρακαταθήκη ειδών σε Μουσεία, Μνημεία και Αρχαιολογικούς χώρους. Ministerial Decision Νο 1417/2005

Εφημερίς της Κυβερνήσεως της Ελληνικής Δημοκρατίας (2007) Προεδρικό Διάταγμα υπ’αριθμόν 118 Κανονισμός Προμηθειών Δημοσίου (Κ.Π.Δ). Presidential Decree 118/2007

Εφημερίς της Κυβερνήσεως της Ελληνικής Δημοκρατίας (2008) Ν. 3711 Ίδρυση νομικού προσώπου δημοσίου δικαίου με την επωνυμία ‘ΜΟΥΣΕΙΟ ΑΚΡΟΠΟΛΗΣ’ και άλλες διατάξεις. Law 3711/2008

Εφημερίς της Κυβερνήσεως της Ελληνικής Δημοκρατίας (2010) Προεδρικό Διάταγμα υπ’ αριθμόν 113 Ανάληψη Υποχρεώσεων από τους Διατάκτες. Presidential Decree 113/2010

Εφημερίς της Κυβερνήσεως της Ελληνικής Δημοκρατίας (2014) Ν. 4281 Μέτρα στήριξης και ανάπτυξης της ελληνικής οικονομίας, οργανωτικά θέματα Υπουργείου Οικονομικών και άλλες διατάξεις. Law 4281/2014

Καλού, Κ. (2014) Το πορτοκαλί χρώμα της οικονομίας. Available at: http://www.tovima.gr/vimagazino/interviews/article/?aid=641202 (Accessed: 27 November 2015).

Καταστατικό | ΟΙ ΦΙΛΟΙ ΤΟΥ ΝΟΜΙΣΜΑΤΙΚΟΥ ΜΟΥΣΕΙΟΥ (2008) Available at: http://www.filoinma.gr/?page_id=30 [Accessed 27 November 2015].

Καταστατικό Ιδρύσεως ‘Φίλοι του Μουσείου Φυσικής Ιστοριάς Κρήτης’ (no date) Available at: http://nhmcfriendsgr.weebly.com/uploads/5/7/9/8/5798338/neo_katastatiko_filon_mfik.p df (Accessed: 26 November 2015).

Κεραμεικός»: Νέα έκδοση για τον περίφημο αρχαιολογικό χώρο |thetoc.gr (2014) Available at: http://www.thetoc.gr/politismos/article/kerameikos-nea-ekdosi-gia-ton-perifimo- arxaiologiko-xwro [Accessed 26 November 2015].

Κοινοφελής Επιχείρηση Πολλαπλής Ανάπτυξης Δήμου Βέροιας (2011) Kαταστατικό Συλλόγου Φίλων Μουσείου Εκπαίδευσης Βέροιας - Χρ.Τσολάκης’'. Available at: http://www.veriaculture.gr/draseis/ekpaideysi/moyseioekp/367-tsolakis [Accessed 27 November 2015].

Μαστραπάς, Α. (1999). Μνημειακή τοπογραφία της αρχαίας Αθήνας. 2η εκδ. Αθήνα: Καρδαμίτσα.

Οι Φίλοι του Μουσείου Μπενάκη (1957) Available at: http://www.benaki.gr/index.asp?lang=gr&id=705 [Accessed 27 November 2015].

Οι Φίλοι του Μουσείου Μπενάκη» (1957) Available at: http://www.benaki.gr/index.asp?lang=gr&id=705 [Accessed 27 November 2015].

Οργανόγραμμα ΤΑΠ (no date) Available at: http://www.tap.gr/tapadb/files/organograma_tap.pdf [Accessed 24 November 2015].

Πουτέτση, Χ. (2014) Κεφάλαιο «εν υπνώσει» η πολιτιστική κληρονομιά. Available at: http://www.tovima.gr/finance/article/?aid=628849 [Accessed: 27 November 2015].

Πουτέτση, Χ. (2015) Μηχανή παραγωγής πλούτου η πολιτιστική κληρονομιά. Available at: http://www.tovima.gr/finance/article/?aid=725245 [Accessed 27 November 2015].

Σκουμπουρδή Α. (2006(. Αθήνα μια πόλη μαγική. 2η εκδ. Αθήνα: Σιδέρης.

Σωματείο εργατοϋπαλλήλων στη Βιομηχανική Μεταλλευτική (2012) Available at: http://biom-metal.blogspot.gr/ [Accessed 26 November 2015].

Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων (2013) Ανακοίνωση υπ’ αριθμόν ΣΟΧ/1/2013 για τη σύναψη σύμβασης εργασίας ορισμένου χρόνου. Α.Π.: ΔΙΟΙΚ/Α/3309.

Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων (2013) Προκύρηξη πρόχειρου μειοδοτικού δαγωνισμού προμήθειας πιστών αντιγράφων νομισμάτων για διάθεση από τα πωλητήρια του ΤΑΠ. Α.Π.: ΔΙΟΙΚ/Β/7052.

Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων (2013) Τεύχος Προκήρυξης Ανοιχτού Δημόσιου Διαγωνισμού για την παραγωγή και προμήθεια πιστών αντιγράφων εκθεμάτων μουσείων και μνημείων για τα πωλητήρια του ΤΑΠ. Α.Π.: ΔΙΟΙΚ/Β/8197.

Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων (2014) Ανακοίνωση υπ’ αριθμόν ΣΟΧ/1/2014 για σύναψη σύμβασης εργασίας ορισμένου χρόνου. Α.Π.: ΔΙΟΙΚ/Α/251.

Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων (2014) Διενέργεια εκδήλωσης ενδιαφέροντος για την εκτύπωση ‘ΙΣΤΟΡΙΚΩΝ’ και αφισών για τις ανάγκες των πωλητηρίων του ΤΑΠ. Α.Π.: ΔΙΟΙΚ/Β/12906.

Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων (2014) Διενέργεια εκδήλωσης ενδιαφέροντος για την παραγωγή πιστών αντιγράφων τοιχογραφιών για αρχαιολογικά μουσεία της Ελλάδας. Α.Π.: ΔΙΟΙΚ/Β/13870.

Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων (2014) Προκήρυξη πρόχειρου μειοδοτικού διαγωνισμού προμήθειας πιστών αντιγράφων μουσειακών εκθεμάτων για διάθεση από τα πωλητήρια του ΤΑΠ. Α.Π.: ΔΙΟΙΚ/Β/15882.

Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων (2014) Πρόσκληση εκδήλωσης ενδιαφέροντος για την παραγωγή πολιτιστικών εφαρμογών. Α.Π: ΔΙΟΙΚ/Β/3104.

Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων (2015) Πρόσκληση εκδήλωσης ενδιαφέροντος για την παραγωγή πολιτιστικών εφαρμογών: Είδη από μέταλλο. Α.Π.: ΔΙΟΙΚ/Β/2039.

Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων (2015) Πρόσκληση εκδήλωσης ενδιαφέροντος για την παραγωγή πολιτιστικών εφαρμογών: Κεραμικά/ Υάλινα είδη. Α.Π.: ΔΙΟΙΚ/Β/2038.

Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων (2015) Πρόσκληση εκδήλωσης ενδιαφέροντος για την παραγωγή πολιτιστικών εφαρμογών: Κοσμήματα. Α.Π.: ΔΙΟΙΚ/Β/1957.

Ταμείο Αρχαιολογικών Πόρων και Απαλλοτριώσεων (2015) Πρόσκληση εκδήλωσης ενδιαφέροντος για την παραγωγή πολιτιστικών εφαρμογών: Υφασμάτινα είδη. Α.Π.: ΔΙΟΙΚ/Β/2000.

Το Βήμα (2015) Ξυδάκης: Υποχρέωση της κυβέρνησης να προσφέρει στον πολιτισμό. Available at: http://www.tovima.gr/culture/article/?aid=700301 (Accessed: 26 November 2015).

Το διευρυμένο ωράριο μουσείων και χώρων αποδίδει (2014) Available at: http://www.kathimerini.gr/827734/article/epikairothta/ellada/to-dieyrymeno-wrario- moyseiwn-kai-xwrwn-apodidei [Accessed 26 November 2015].

Appendix

Appendix 1- Laws Aims of TAP

• Expropriation or acquisition of property for the excavations, improvement or expansion of monuments and archaeological sites, the environment around the monuments and museum space

• Securing, maintaining, shaping and beautification of archaeological sites, monuments and museums

• Construction and repair of buildings and museum collections and all the auxiliary buildings within archaeological sites

• Lease property for the accomplishment of archaeological causes

• Assistance of services dealing with antiquities and monuments and everything that falls under the Archaeological Law by using all necessary resources of TAP

• Publication and distribution of archaeological journals and archaeological publications

• Creation of workshops and replicas, photographs, or any other kind which will assist the TAP’s work and the state’s archaeological services and will contribute to increase its resources

• Supervision of private businesses and artists in terms of manufacturing and selling all kinds of casts, reproductions or copies of ancient objects, which are committed under the right of the State’s direct or indirect exploitation

TAP's Resources are:

• State grants

• Grants from the Greek National Tourism Organization and other public organizations

• Expropriated buildings

• Revenue arising from any use of archaeological property that falls under the responsibility of the state's archaeological service

• Building rents

• Revenues from the exercise of professions in archaeological sites and museums

• Fee income from private businesses using spaces belonging to the archaeological services

• Income from fees for filming and taking pictures within monuments, museums and archaeological sites

• Revenues from charges for the production of molds by any material, photographs or postcards of any size from antiquities, museum exhibits and collections, including historical monuments

• Revenue from publications of photos with archaeological content

• Revenues from events taking place in ancient theaters and archeological sites

• Income from archaeological sites’ and monuments’ tickets

• Revenue from sales of archaeological publications, films, photographs, slides and illustrations with archaeological content, produced or issued or sold by TAP

• Revenue from the sale of whole species of casts produced or sold by TAP

• Acceptance of donations, inheritance or legacies

• Penalties or fines imposed by the archaeological legislation

Expenses that coincide with TAP’s objectives are the following:

• Salaries of wages or overtime work and reimbursement for all staff

• Lawyers

• Editorial expenses (authors, translators)

• Compensation of craftsmen and conservators of provincial museums

• Expropriations of mobile and immobile property

• Building Demolition

• Buying real estate for housing for all of its services

• Operating expenses of all services

• Cleaning of all services

• Telephone bills of all services

• Expenses of all bills, stationery and supplies of all services

• Purchases of materials for making casts, and copies of all items for sale and disposal

• Purchase of vehicles and their costs

• Organisation, equipment, maintenance and operation of all types of laboratories

• Organisation of all libraries belonging to the service and all the costs

• Organisation and maintenance of shops and items sold

• Establishment and operation of schools of antiquities

• Ticket printing

• Archaeological publications

• Displays for all TAP's products

• Conservation and repairs of Museums and Archaeological Collections

• Conservation projects to prevent damage

• Building outposts and auxiliary facilities where needed

• Design, creation, maintenance and protection of gardens in archaeological sites and museums

• Expenses of all special uniforms for all services

• Financing excavation work, maintenance, restorations of ancient monuments and exhibitions

• Financial aid of Curators who work abroad and those who undertake research internally on behalf of the General Directorate of Antiquities and Restoration

• Topography and cadastre creation of all archaeological estates

• File of archaeological monuments with illustrations, photography and bibliographic information

Appendix 2 Law 3028/2002, Chapter 6, Article 46, paragraph 4

‘For the reproduction, production and dissemination to the public, for direct or indirect economic or commercial purpose, casts, copies or illustrations of monuments belonging to the State or property situated in archaeological sites and historical places or isolated or movable objects that are in museums or collections of the State, by any manner or means, including those of electronic and digital, the Internet, the telecommunications network or other connection and the creation of databases with images of all the above, from other entities or persons other than the public, TAP and the organization for the Promotion of Greek Culture, is required prior authorization. Licenses are issued against payment in favor of TAP, to natural or legal persons, by the Minister’s of Culture decision, in which duration of the authorization and the conditions under which the fee is paid are defined.’

Appendix 3 Human Resources Proposal It would be beneficial for the Heritage shop at Kerameikos to employ staff with the right capabilities, as this enhances the experience of the site and the museum as a whole. Since our shop will not have many staff, these one or two persons need to incorporate the mission of the site into their everyday work. To be able to do this they must have the following prerequisites:

Ability and To be able to engage with customers in a friendly way Competencies To create customer relations and retention Be able to work in a quiet environment and not get bored Ability to use numbers in a practical way Be creative in ways of promoting the shop, i.e. marketing and display of shop Be well mannered Training during Yearly training on customer relations working Yearly Managerial and administration training for the chance to apply for higher positions in this organisation or others Seasonal selling method training in order to keep up with customer demand

Education Knowledge about Kerameikos Knowledge of ancient Greek History Good level of English and Greek Other languages an asset

Table 10- Staff abilities and competencies, training and education recommendations

Appendix 4 - The statues of establishments of associations

The statute of establishment of each association has basic principles that help in understanding the operation of the specific entity:

 It has specific goals and objectives  Refers to what means will be used to achieve its goals  Made up of members who are divided into categories, who have been rights and obligations  The General Assembly is the supreme and prevailing body of the Association  Financial management is composed by the General Assembly  The responsibilities of the elected members are listed in detail  The resources come from annual contributions, special contributions, sponsorships, production and sale of various items, income from events etc.

Appendix 5 Brief History of Kerameikos

The archaeological site of the Kerameikos, currently located in the urban centre of Ermou, Peireos, and Asomaton Street, is a small part of the ancient Attic Deme of Kerameon, which was one of the largest demes of ancient Athens, situated on the northwest edge of the ancient city. The name “Kerameikos” comes from the Greek word for

Figure 8-Overlooking view of the Pompeion, Dipylon pottery (Banou, Bournias, 2014: gate, the dried up Eridanos river and Agia Triada church 17, Mastrapas, 1992:111) which at Kerameikos Archaeological site, Athens Source: Elizabeth Kearsey is the root for the word ceramics in English (Origin: variant of keramic < Greek keramikós, equivalent to kéram (os) potters' clay + -ikos –ic).

At first sight, Kerameikos might only seem to be the ancient cemetery of Athens and/or the potter’s settlement (Fig1).

Even as it is now, the site has the image of a very tranquil place, as a modern cemetery should be (fig.2), or as a secret oasis with a small, gentle river flowing through the site where the only sound resonating is that of frogs. But in Archaic and Classical Athens, Kerameikos was a different place. It was one of the most important cultural hubs of Athens (Banou, Bournias, 2014: 184, Mastrapas, 1992:123), full of people, art, noise, smells, dirt, traffic and constant Figure 9 movement. Grave Stele at Kerameikos archaeological site, Athens. Source: Elizabeth Kearsey

Kerameikos included and combined all aspects of everyday life within this area where the archaeological site is now. People would be seen in the midst of daily activities simply living out their lives; from working, socializing, mourning or praying. (Skoumpourdis, 2006:231) All of these disparate, yet they fundamentally connected parts of human life, which created nothing less than a harmonic combination of life and death, hosted altogether in the one area. Kerameikos was not only the main production centre of the famous attic vases, but also the place where the famous ‘Dipylon Oinochoe’13 was excavated by German

Figure 10- archaeologists in the 1870s. The ‘Dipylon Oinochoe’ is a Attic Oinochoe, h: 0.23 m., wine jug that dates to circa 740 BCE and is extremely Dipylon Cemetery, 740-725 B.C. Source: National Archaeological important because it bears the earliest example found so Museum, Athens 192, David far of an inscription written in the Greek alphabet (Fig.3). Gilman Romano Website: Not only did the site of Kerameikos contain the two main http://davidgilmanromano.org/c ourses/ancient-athletics/lecture- gates of the defensive Themistoclean wall (the sacred images/7 gate and the Dipylon gate), but it was also believed to be a very crowded crossroads where people entered the city of Athens from all across the ancient known world (Banou, Bournias, 2014: 182, Mastrapas, 1992: 148). Back then the place was a hive of activity, an interactive centre where people could find almost anything they wanted, from accommodation and entertainment to many different goods and merchandise sold in a fully equipped market.

The cemetery in Kerameikos was the largest and most important cemetery of ancient Athens; both for private and public burials (Skoumpourdis, 2006:118, Banou, Bournias, 2014: 188). The most influential Athenian citizens were usually buried here, along with war heroes who fought for the city and deserved the highest honour and respect. This cemetery is also the location (Mastrapas, 1992:118), where the influential statesman Pericles delivered his famous Funeral Oration, as recorded in Thucydides’ ‘History of the Peloponnesian War’ (2nd book par. 2.35 - 2.44).

13 Named after the location where it was found, the Dipylon Cemetery, next to the Dipylon gate inside Kerameikos. It is now kept in the Athens National Archaeological Museum.

Kerameikos was also the starting point for two major and extremely important ancient Greek processions (Banou, Bournias, 2014: 186); that of the Eleusinian mysteries and the Panathenaic Festival. The area of Kerameikos was at the very centre of huge preparations for these events. The Eleusinian mysteries would lead the initiation procession from the Dipylon gate and take the sacred way (Iera Odos) to the town of Eleusis, whereas the procession of the Panathenaic Festival would begin here and make its ascent up to the Acropolis.

To sum up Kerameikos embodies much more than simply a burial site or a potter’s community. It is an extraordinary example of a dynamic cultural centre of the ancient world, a continuously crowded and active place where people gathered for many different purposes; either for paying tribute to the gods, mourning their beloved dead, to celebrate, to work, shop, pass by, or just hang out and socialise with other members of the community. Kerameikos is one of the best examples of an ancient site that encompasses daily life in all of its diverse forms and expressions.

Appendix 6 -Kerameikos SOUV Statement of Outstanding Universal Value Criteria (UNESCO, 2005)

I. - Kerameikos archaeological site is, and was, an open space of different masterpieces of art (Banou and Bournas, 2014: 13) and ancient engineering with many great pieces on show, both throughout the site and in the museum, such as the Kerameikos bull (Fig.4) and the funeral stele of Ampharete (fig.5). As well as this there are many other sculptures, pottery, water wells, elaborate gates and sarcophagi situated around the site. Figure 11- The idea of art masterpieces has also Marble bull from the tomb of Dionysios of Kollytos, 345-338 BC Source: Elizabeth Kearsey

extended to outside the archaeological site, where there are numerous recycled open spaces used to display artwork from around the world (LIFO, 2015).

Furthermore the site, itself has a continued use today, being a space for contemporary artists to display their work from different parts of the world (Protothema, 2015). There has been a recent attraction towards Kerameikos for its space, not only in the archaeological site but the surrounding areas, because it was and still is a hub of artistic impression, displaying human creative genius through different works of art Figure 12- The grave stele of and engineering. Ampharete, c.430-420BC, Kerameikos Museum Source: Victoria Darragh II. Kerameikos’ greatest influences come from its intangible https://archaeologyonlinejournal. value. Throughout time the events that have taken place at wordpress.com/vol-1-no-1-march- 2013/representations-of-women- Kerameikos have had lasting effect on many generations across in-classical-athenian-grave-stele- the world, such as Pericles funeral oration (Thuc. History of victoria-darragh/ Peloponnesian War 2.34-2.46) which influenced Abraham

Lincoln’s Gettysburg address in 1864 (Wills, 1992:1). Furthermore, religious ceremonies at Kerameikos display great influence throughout time, like the Eleusinian mysteries of which the pilgrimage to Eleusis began at Kerameikos. Of those initiates were the Roman emperor, Hadrian and the playwright Aeschylus among many others. This procession still happens today, starting at Kerameikos (Keller, 2009).

III. Kerameikos is an outstanding example of a civilization, both living and dead, since Kerameikos archaeological site is an ancient cemetery, but the surrounding areas are thriving with life. Kerameikos represents the ancient Greek life intertwined with the modern.

IV. Much of the architecture in Kerameikos has had different, yet significant stages of history. Examples of these stages are during the Persian sack of Athens in 480 B.C. and again in 86 B.C. when the Roman dictator Sulla razed Kerameikos after a significant bloodbath during the siege of Athens. Kerameikos survived until circa 500 AD where it was then left in ruins, only to be discovered again in 1863 (Goette, 2001: 55-59).

V. Kerameikos is a recognised ecological site and is one of the only sites in which the fauna and flora from when it was first built still remains today in many ways (Banou and Bournas, 2014). Despite the irreversible changes of air pollution in Athens (Living in Greece, 2007), the site remains to be an ecological habitat for many animals and insects.

Integrity (Cameron, 2014: 133)

Kerameikos has remained unchanged from the Byzantine era of the site, since its excavation in 1863. However, parts of the site still contain elements of ancient Greek history such as the Dipylon Gate built in the 5th Century BC (Goette, 2001: 59) to the Stele of Ampharete, sculpted in the Classical Period (Goette, 2001: 59). Many other buildings from these periods were burnt down by numerous attacks, and the Romans rebuilt parts of the site. To this day, authentic materials from this period remain in the site; such as the Pompeion building. The most integral part of Kerameikos is that it is the only archaeological site within a capital city that has flora, fauna and remains of an ancient river still existing today (Banou and Bournas, 2014). As well as this, it is the only excavated cemetery that has been excavated in Athens which represents rituals of the dead and everyday life.

Authenticity (Denyer, 2011)

Form and design - Kerameikos has remained relatively unchanged since its excavation in the 19th century. Apart from the sculptures, which are housed in the museum, identical replicas replace the sculptures in order to protect the original statue’s authenticity.

100

Materials and substance - The site contains much flora and fauna which still remain today as they were when the site was in full use (Banou and Bournas, 2014).

Use and function – The site was a hub of life, both for the living and the dead. Today the site and the surrounding area remain as a place for everyday life, where many social interactions take place. This function of Kerameikos has never changed.

Traditions, techniques and management systems - The religious traditions of Kerameikos still take place today, where the sacred gate and the sacred road are used for the annual procession to Elefsina and the Panathenia. This is an imitation of the ancient festival that once began at the site.

Language - Kerameikos has been responsible for a number of linguistic styles throughout history in different ways. The site has the intangible influence of the great speeches from the classical period. The ‘Dipylon Oinochoe’ contains the earliest known example found inscribed in the Greek alphabet. As well as this, the English word ceramics is derived and influenced from the name of Kerameikos.

Spirit and feeling – The spirit and feeling of Kerameikos has remained. As Stated several times, it was the ancient hub of life and this now has extended further into modern times to be a hub of life in modern Athens.

101

Appendix 7 - Interview Transcripts Interview with Nicholas Kontoprias, Director of Herakleidon Museum Place: Herakleidon Museum, Athens, Greece

1. As museum director, do you deal much with the museum shop, or do you have a shop manager who takes care of everything? Not so much anymore, the manager takes care of it. We have had to make adjustments because of the current crisis in Greece. Everything nowadays is money based and competitors have almost become irrelevant. Basically if you manage to keep your doors open, this is considered a victory. Promotional work and positioning are important.

The shop is important as long as the museum itself is operating. We do not always open the shop; this is dependent on museum traffic. Visitation has dropped. Nowadays we mainly deal with school groups and if we have no visits planned, it doesn’t make sense to keep the shop open.

2. What benefits does the shop bring to your museum? Thematic, quality and price. These are the three most important features of the product. There is not one object in the museum shop that is necessary for the home so people in Greece’s current climate will generally choose more essential items to purchase. Museum shop products can wait for better days to purchase.

I will tell you about an experience that I had in a museum in Madrid (Prado Museum). It was an art exhibition and almost at every corner of the route they had a gift shop. It was annoying because you couldn’t avoid them and there must have been at least four or five of these shops throughout the exhibition path. The experience of the exhibition was constantly being interrupted which ended up ruining the experience of the museum as a whole. They just wanted to maximise sales and didn’t think enough about visitor satisfaction.

A museum shop at the entrance/exit is the perfect location. You just need to use common sense, and put yourself in the shoes of the visitor. Think what it is about the experience that I felt good about, and apply this to the shop.

3. What are the main demographics of your visitors? Mainly kids with their parents and school groups; both Greeks and foreigners. The demographics of a museum can be predicted only to a certain extent. It is only during operation that you get to know this more clearly.

102

4. What is the process you go through for product selection? Do you have designers that come to you with product ideas or vice versa? A bit of both actually. Sometimes designers will come to us with their products, for example jewellery makers. Sometimes we will search for them. One positive position that we are in, because of the current crisis in Greece, is that we are able to make certain deals with suppliers. For example, we might purchase products on consignment so that the supplier will get a cut of every item we sell. This can work out advantageous for both parties.

5. Do you look for particular skills in shop staff? Basic skills in retail, and computing. They need to be friendly, tidy, organised and presentable as they are essentially the face of the museum.

6. In terms of financial return, what is the approximate percentage of the museum’s income that is generated from museum shop sales? Quite small, approximately 15%. We also had a museum café but this wasn’t so successful. We had the problem that people in Greece will buy one coffee and sit for four hours to chat. As you can imagine this didn’t work out so well.

7. How effective is your E-shop? Our E-shop has not been a big hit actually. The difficult part is setting it up, but after that it is relatively easy to maintain. We haven’t concentrated much on the business model for the E- shop nor have we done extensive advertising for it. One advantage with an E-shop is that sometimes visitors will want to purchase something from the physical shop, but often have a weight issue with their bags. The E-shop allows them to make the purchase later and have it sent straight to them.

8. What products, or types of product, are the most popular in your shop? This depends on the exhibition that the museum is running. When we have thematic products that directly relate to the exhibition showing, people buy these and they are very popular. If the exhibition is over and we still have these products in the shop, no one will purchase them. Timing and stock management is important.

Parents will purchase items for their kids that will keep them occupied, that are educational, creative, hands-on and good quality. For example we sell a cube made of separate pieces that you build up to teach kids about fractions, as well as other products designed to help better understand maths. It is important to always research the market and keep products up to date.

103

Interview with Konstantinos – Shop staff and jewellery maker Place: Folk Art Museum Shop, Monastiraki, Athens, Greece

Do all of the products on sale here go through TAP first?

No, as far as I’m aware the products in this shop don’t have anything to do with TAP. Individual designers will create the products and sell them to the museum.

Is this museum owned by the state?

Yes.

I thought all state museums had to get their products via TAP?

Not that I am aware of, however, I’m not so sure about the legalities involved. Perhaps this museum shop is not legally bound to TAPA as it is run by the Friends of the Greek Folk Art Museum. I don’t know for sure, it’s just what I think. It might be helpful if you speak with the museum director. She will know more than me about the process.

Do individual designers come to the museum with ideas first, or does the museum seek out specific designers?

Usually a designer will create a product or prototype and approach the museum first. This is what I do with my jewellery.

What is the process for product creation?

The designer will create a product that might be inspired by one of the exhibitions that the museum has. These need to be connected with the museum itself in some way, and usually the inspiration of the product will come directly from one of the artefacts on display.

How the situation is right now since the museum itself is closed for refurbishment?

People come into the shop and they don’t really know what we are selling because there is nowhere for them to see the actual artefacts in the museum on which the products are usually based. The products that we have seem to be out of context until the museum reopens.

104

Interview with Aspasia Louvi – Head of TAP Place: TAP central office, Panepistimou Street, Athens, Greece

Definition of visitation14 – Low ticket price

Tickets are surprisingly low in price. It is unacceptable to pay only 12 euros to see the Acropolis, Ancient Agora, Kerameikos and so much more.

Political leadership with no cultural background

The origin of TAP’s abjection was that it was administered by a board without a general manager. Every time the Greek government changes so do the directors of TAPA and other government departments. All the political leaderships have been changing so frequently in the last few years. The former manager was a retired naval officer with only general administrative knowledge, and ignorance of cultural issues.

Lack of experienced personnel / workforce in each department

The current department started operating on the 3rd of April. There is not a single accountant inside TAP’s workforce. Furthermore, the head of the accounting department has studied sociology. When someone asks what is happening in the accounting department, depending on your questions the answers are that person A knows the answer and B knows the other answer. The problem is that you miss the general picture, meaning that there is nobody inside TAP that knows exactly what is going on with all the money.

Low tickets / incorrect implementation of the state / incorrect legal framework and bureaucracy

The revenues of this sector come from the tickets and the shops. The ticket price and how many visitors / comers / attendants we have are all related.

The highest revenue is the shops. However, the state has not organized themselves correctly in the commercial sector regarding archaeological sites and museums.

Objects for sale that are created (souvenirs/products) are being renamed, by us as ‘inspirational applications’. This is the exact term that we will use from now on. All the objects that can be used, for example: clothes, cups, bags, t-shirts that bring the memory of a specific site or museum.

14 The term ‘visitation’ in Greek means visit an open space, and it has not a quantitative meaning (big or small). The correct term is the word attendance (Gr: προσέλευση)(or coming / arrival/ turnout)

105

Very important category: plaster or matrix or mold (same thing; a certified copy). Α Matrix can only be created by TAP’s expert (and belongs to the organisation) who is called ‘ekmageas’ and is the only person who can approach the original object (new legal framework). Until now anyone who had a good artisan could come at TAP, pay the fees and copy the original object without any restrictions.

Procedures followed in creating exact replicas

To create a faithful copy, one must follow the standards of the original cast. From the original cast one model comes out, namely the exact copy, and thus no one damages the original object again. The craftsman (ekmageas) then creates a cast of production which, for example, if it has been broken, he goes back to the model and not the original.

All these processes have been legislated extremely well in France, where there is an organization with specific structure and functions. Greece also has this same organization which is not working as expected so far.

The craftsmanship, which has been implemented since the 18th century, has two aims:

 to enrich other museum collections  To produce replicas for rich collectors such us kings, who determined the spiritual life and education for others. One example is that these rich collectors made donations to universities

Before this mass production starts, there was a confined need of exact replicas, and now with the museum openness towards the public – which has and is continuing to happen over the last thirty years – with the extremely friendly museographic approach and the interactive actions that take place inside museums, the exact replica’s demand is now bigger. For this reason TAP moves to an institutionalization. Organizationally TAP needs changes and currently there is no known number from cast artists and merchants holding precise molds that can reproduce. From now on with the new legislation this will be controlled.

Andrianou Shops

One category that slightly interests TAP, and to which everyone prefers to visit, is Adrianou Street and sadly all of TAP shops. These shops sell copies that are not exact copies and are maltreated, either as to their dimensions, either in terms of color, their patina or their damages.

106

Example explaining what one means by exact copies

The following example helps to understand what Dr. Aspasia Louvi means. Some friends brought here as a gift; a vase with a depiction of an octopus. In the original panathenaic vase, the back side was destroyed, but the artist chose to paint at the damaged part another octopus. In one perspective, this is high art, but from the other, this is wrong in relation to the original. This may cause great harm in education by creating entirely false impressions about what antiquities are like today. Τhis category of free copies, though, is the biggest selling category. TAP’s shops and also those of the Acropolis museum are full of counterfeit copies and this emerged because there were no criteria and monitoring in all the necessary procedures.

Who takes the blame?

As for what we call ‘inspired applications’ it is worth mentioning that until now the whole process was moving with completely flawed procedures to the point of catastrophe. Reason for this fact is the continuous change of the respective administrations arising from political governments. These administrations had no idea whatsoever of heritage management, but neither did they have the time to get involved. When Ms. Louvi accepted TAP’s head position, all officials informed her that she is the seventh person to take the position within three years.

Procedures for choosing products

TAP had reached a breaking point and could make assignments to whoever was interested of up to 20,000 euro. Initially, they ran a contest and a dossier was sent at TAP’s offices which was opened by three different employees. They were three permanent officials from TAP and two others who came as representatives of the Ministry of Culture. This group chose products as they saw fit to be sold in the museums. There are inklings that some were bribed. Those people held the same positions for many years and the market knows them.

Bad quality of TAP's products

When the current head arrived at the offices of TAP, she found - among the products for sale - things that one would find on Adrianou Street and a few others which even the merchants15 of Adrianou Street would design to put in their displays. The objects had

15 The Head of TAP with this comment implies that merchants who sell souvenirs at Adrianou Street don’t have the same quality in products and do not sell items that are value related with an archaeological site.

107 abominable quality. Thus, TAP Shops that exist today are the result of a completely nonexistent quality control.

Future Strategy for products

The strategy to be followed from now on concerns a wide design competition for ‘inspiring applications’. The regulation requirements refer that TAP puts in a tender/ competitive procedure for the same products, all stakeholders and a board judges the talent of the designer. There will be 10 competitors who will share the work of each archaeological ephorate/ curator.

Preparations before the implementation of the new strategy

Before venturing this competition Ms. Louvi’s first job in May 2015 was to send some documents to all ephorates announcing that if any shop would like to acquire its own identity, it should examine the documents and send to the chairman a relevant report with all questions answered, and also make a list of what each body wants. When each ephorate will acquire its identity, the products related, for example to Mystras, will be sold there and not in Knossos, and the products related to Knossos will be sold only at Knossos.16 The request of the head was to answer two simple questions for inspirational applications. Initially, they were asked to send to TAP central offices the designs and objects bearing each body’s identity (Brand name), either a museum or an archaeological site. Then, if the ephorates want to cast/mold objects from new excavations, they will be considered as characteristic features and the Ephorates should inform TAP for this demand in order for the procedures to begin.

The positive thing is that 80% of participants from Ephorates responded to the call and their own demands are the ones that will be proposed in this contest. The others who have not participated will be excluded from this contest in order to comply for the next time.

At the end of November 2015, the program will be completed and TAP will receive by designers their proposals. In December 2015 the committee will decide who are the winners and will give one month time limit for them to design these proposals. Then, there will be a very large production contest. This means that, for example bags will be created that ‘fit’ to

16 This is a move that is consistent with the rationale of the writers that all of the Heritage Shops should have their own distinctive identity and products should only have value relativeness to the archaeological site / museum they represent. This idea is examined to be embodied in Kerameikos with this research.

108 a production of 200,000 euro and not at 20 euro. This will provide 100,000 pieces, and in each bag different names will be printed as Kerameikos, Acropolis etc. The head said that the only way for Heritage Shops to create an identity within the public sector is the aforementioned.

Discussions for TAP changing to a private legal entity

Ms. Louvi lists that earlier, before her chairmanship, there was the attempt for TAP’s changeover to a private entity (OPEK), which failed miserably. She explains why the project failed because ‘our system is such that when a cooperation of good will and respect opens from both sides, then fraud begins.’ Within this context, OPEK has loaded many ‘sins’.

The private sector cooperating with the public sector, is that possible?

The answer to the question whether the private sector can work with the public sector is positive. In the near future will be given in the market 200,000 Euros for work and about 3- 4.000.000 will be given to producers.

E-Shop

The e-shop, its creation and promotion, is in TAP’s future plans, which is believed will greatly benefit the organization and the Ministry of Culture.

Finances

A key issue is how the allocation of money between museums and archaeological sites is split. The situation described is very simple and perverse as Ms. Louvi states characteristically. She explains how TAP works in order for the Ministry of Culture to operate. TAP pays all the Ministry’s needs and from the leftover proceeds gives up to 40% to the Ministry of Culture. In a scandal in the days of the new head, it was learned that a joint ministerial decision was signed which announces 40% of all revenues will be given to the Ministry. Namely, if TAP manages all the programs that will run to double its revenues, it will be obliged to give about half of this to the Ministry of Culture to meet all Ephorates needs. The question that arises is what the actual needs of the Ephorates are. TAP and managers do not know what is done with the money left over. Money is taken by the Ministry’s central accounting department and is used to meet the Ephorates needs. ‘What needs do they cover at last, when rents of shops and maintenance of museums is paid directly by TAP?’ Therefore, it is understood that somewhere in this ‘transfer course’ money is ‘lost’ or used for other causes.

109

Still on the subject of money, the writers introduce an assumption which says that there is a museum which does not have a large visitation and does not cut many tickets within the year. For its further promotion the museum decides to integrate an educational program to attract new visitors. The question is: Can this museum ask for money from TAP to design and implement the educational program? The answer given is a clear and fast ‘No’, in which the explanation is simple. In a bankrupt state any Ephorate is not allowed to come out to the public with exhibitions, projects and educational programs. Each Ephorate with its own income and with its own means will implement its plans and will integrate in these plans all its employees, guards and volunteers; otherwise it will not do anything.

The relation with the Acropolis Museum

TAP is not entitled anything from the Acropolis Museum. This had been decided from previous political leadership and this serves specific groups.17

Museums with subsidiaries exist in well-governed countries. When the Acropolis museum has in conjunction with the Acropolis archaeological site, 1000000 to 3.000.000 visitors per year, there can be no self management since all staff salaries are provided by the state. All costs are paid, and the only obligations of the Acropolis museum are to pay water and phone bills; let's call them operating expenses. Additionally, it has great educational programs that are worth a lot of money.

According to Ms. Louvi’s view it is about implementation of unfortunate policies and brings as an example the Museum of Ancient Mycenae. This museum is not of accidental importance and holds the treasure of Aidonia. With such practices and agreements as stated above, TAP will be forced to close the museum’s doors, if it can not manage to take some money from the Acropolis museum. This money can be shared among museums that have fewer attendance and whereby can have the means to attract more visitors.

17 TAP does not take anything from the Acropolis Museum. It has to do with previous political leadership and has served and impressed some because they began at the end of the process.

110

Danger of TAP shop closure

Ms. Louvi continues saying that many shops will close down, and explains that when there are shops that have revenues of around 3,000 euro per year, they cannot recoup neither the employee’s salary nor their running costs.

All the above are in a rationalization stage.

Absence of criteria for choosing quality products

Another problem highlighted is that there are no qualitative criteria for selecting products or trained staff to support the new strategic policy that TAP has set very optimistically.

Regarding products at the Louvre museum, the price for replicas starts from 200 euros. In Greece small replicas are sold for 12 euro.

From what the head says, it is understood that TAP needs to change in terms of organization. All these problems should be sorted now before the political situation changes and everything starts from the beginning.

Possible locations for establishing a heritage shop at Kerameikos

The writers asked what locations would be possible to be characterized as suitable for establishing a shop for the archaeological site of Kerameikos, and if there is the possibility of using buildings which are under the umbrella of the Ministry of Culture. The next question was whether an individual may pay rent to the Ministry of Culture and use the place / building for commercial purposes.

The answer is no. It would be desirable in theory to be ‘employee-sellers’ who rent the space / building, give a percentage of profits to TAP and keep the rest as their own profit. But this can only be done if object production is unhampered and runs. It cannot be the employee-seller who asks 150 replicas and TAP to not be able to deliver the order. Therefore, in order for TAP to cooperate with the private sector, the production will have to be set up very well so as to work effectively at that stage.

Regarding the buildings belonging to the Ministry of Culture, if it is not right next to the site or in the museum, you lose the customer. If you build a Kerameikos Heritage Shop in Plaka, you have lost the customers. It needs a lot of luck to have an expropriated house outside the entrance of Kerameikos which is restored in order to become a shop.

111

Use of existing buildings for establishing a heritage shop at Kerameikos

The interviewers wondered if there is a building used by another department of the Ministry of Culture beside Kerameikos, and if so, is it possible to have a change in departments in charge. At the exit gate of the archaeological site that is no longer in use, there is a building called the ‘Research Centre of Messinian Studies’. Could that building be proposed as an option for a heritage shop in Kerameikos?

The head responds positively that the research could potentially go somewhere else and it has no relation to the archaeological site of Kerameikos. So, hypothetically speaking there is no need having this centre next to the site.

Conclusion

The interview closed by discussing about the problems that TAP faces up to now, and what TAP is going to confront in the near future. The whole country is in a state of memorandums and there is no possibility of flexible movements. Lastly, TAP needs a general manager who will coordinate everything and onw who definitely has heritage management skills. The Ministry cannot help at the moment because it has bigger problems to solve.

Interview with the managers of European village

Place: European Village, Monastiriou 140 & Tilaphanous

The European village was created in 2006. It is an urban company and a non-profit organization. The Collaborative Café started in 2009 as an idea for the operation of a collaborative space of socialization, a social economy experiment, a step for events and discussions. The creators were ten people.

The site began operating in May 2010, as the legal form of a civil non-profit company. Their objective was the proof that a different economic business model can be viable and healthy, unlike with what is shown by the existing system which only exploits and destroys.

The space was unrented for a long time. The team was lucky in legal matters because the space in the past was used as a shop, so it had already obtained the necessary authorization to open again as a shop.

They have worked with many different groups and have implemented many actions in the archaeological site of Plato's Academy and elsewhere. They are open to ideas that have a positive social impact and invite people from all parts of Attica and farther. They see the

112 coffee shop as a window for the rest of Athens where people are molded and always leave with new knowledge, different experiences, memory and positive thinking.

The logic which defines them fully is the logic of ‘commons’, such as a park which has no barriers, it exists for everyone without exception.

For all bureaucratic matters the only person ‘running’ was mainly Chrysostomos; quite a large, time-consuming and tedious process. They had little assistance from lawyers and accountants. At first they had no system in the way of organizing things, which created problems:

A. At the beginning orders for cooking staples were never correct, so one day the café had leftovers and the next products were not enough

B. Problems in relation to revenues and expenses

C. Problems of losing focus

D. Communication problems between the members

But over the years, and with the subsequent experience, things are now much better. One solution and change that helped a lot was dividing responsibilities between each member.

They give a typical salary to the person working as a waiter. The coffee costs one euro, the beer 2 euro and snacks 3 euro. They do not have profit as a goal. If there is any profit they invest it socially, with educational programs, festivals and other actions. The next goal is to try to produce their products as oil, wine and ‘raki’.18 In addition, they also have a social contribution box where everyone, if he wants, donates in order to cover the costs of coffee or to help organize activities.

Since the café has opened, the majority of residents have welcomed them. Of course, some were conservative and cautious with them at the beginning. They coexist in harmont with the nearby snack tavern. Plus, residents argue that because of the cafe the neighborhood has become friendlier, more human and things have changed for the better.

But there were problems and complaints because of the fuss caused by regular visitors. There were times when neighbors who were annoyed called the police. But all these incidents now belong to the past.

18 Raki is an alcoholic beverage, a fragrant, grape-based pomace brandy of Cretan origin that contains 40%–65% alcohol by volume

113

The tables on the pavement opposite the coffee shop were put out illegally, resulting in some negative feedback so they decided to move them. However, the next day all of the tables were placed back on the pavement next to Plato’s Academy. Very recently they have received a formal permission that enables them to have tables and chairs on the pavement but only if they leave enough space for walkways. This means that the tables should occupy only half a meter of the sidewalk. So having the tables there, despite the permission, they are still illegal because there is not much space left for people to walk as the whole sidewalk is only half a meter.

Through the operation of the café we strive for:

 The promotion of a social, solidary economy

 The direct, unmediated contact with the producer

 Products that respect the environment, the earth and the worker

 The reduction of our ‘ego’ through cooperation, dialogue and consensus

‘We want the café to be seen as an "urban laboratory" of transition from the economic model that we live to an alternative economic model.’

People who are active in the café’s organization have made a website and promote a very big part of their activities through there. Common practice for them is the use a marketing tool which is called ‘word of mouth marketing’.

Finally, it is worth noting that all of those described above lasted over three years to enable today's managers to say that they have achieved their primary goal. For further information, see their website (European Village, 2015).

114

Interview with Acropolis Museum 1. What were the roles of the team members involved in creating the museum shop? Was it a collaborative process or the idea of one person?

The Museum Shop was an integral part of the Museum’s design from the beginning. The shop’s stock on opening was essentially developed by a small team of staff with the Board’s input, but it has evolved considerably since then.

2. When you first began establishing the museum shop was there a strategic/marketing plan you have followed in the creation of the shop? (Mission, vision, goals etc.) If so, may we see it?

Yes. Sorry no we do not make internal commercial documents available to third parties.

3. Is the museum shop privately owned, like Acropolis New Museum café?

The café is not privately owned nor is the restaurant; it is leased out to a contractor. The Museum’s shop is managed and run by the Museum in total.

4. How do you decide the layout of the shop? Do you take into consideration customer behaviour?

The layout of the shop was originally designed by the Museum architect and his co workers. We are currently considering a new layout based on our experiences with visitors and staff.

5. What stakeholders did you have to consider in the creation of the museum shop?

The Board of Management of the Museum principally and at the time of opening the ’OPEP’ which were the body that initially ran the shop for the Museum before they were bankrupted and withdrew from all Museum shops.

6. How do you collaborate with producers/designers? Do they approach you or vice versa?

Both. But we have an open invitation on our website and we now, once a year, welcome proposals for new ideas. We choose stock however on the basis of our sales analysis and design issues – so that items fit with something we consider being the ‘brand’ of the Museum. Sometimes there needs to be changes, and staff work with suppliers to get what we want.

7. Do the designers/producers follow a procedure like TAP i.e. a selective process out of several designer /producers?

115

The entire public sector is able to allocate contracts to a supplier where there goods are unique or where they have exclusive supplier rights in Greece, so we occasionally have suppliers that have not competed directly against someone else to sell their products through the museum where they are able to demonstrate they satisfy this criteria. We also however go to tender for competition with some goods.

8. Do you have any criteria for the selection of the products, and what procedures are followed in order to decide what products are sold?

Yes we do have criteria/checklist that include that all our items must be linked to our exhibits – as well as criteria relating to price, quality, and relevance to the Museum. A Committee considers product proposals. As I have already said we also look at our existing stock and our experience with previous products etc. in making a decision on what to buy in which also entails us looking at sales figures and trends.

9. How do you decide the categories of products and why?

On the basis of analysis of our figures on what visitors want and buy and our view of what sorts of things we think are appropriate to stock in the Museum shop.

10. Seeing how popular and large the Acropolis New Museum shop is, have you considered opening an E-shop?

Yes however it demands staff and storage space we do not have currently.

11. What do you think is the most successful area of the museum shop? Why?

The cast copies are very important and have wide appeal because of their high quality and accuracy. Many specific products are successful and it depends what you mean by success. Some satisfy a very large number of customers and others sell less but have a higher profit margin. Both are important.

12. Do you think the Acropolis New Museum shop adds to the experience of the visitors, if yes how, if no why not?

It extends the Museum experience of visitors by providing them with material objects that are inspired by the Museum collections, and in this way enables them to take a reminder of the Museum exhibits with them and a memento of the Museum experience.

116

13. Given that the Acropolis New Museum is incredibly popular, not only in Greece, but in Europe, have you ever considered a membership option for the museum, similar to those offered by other popular museum worldwide?

Yes but we have not proceeded for a number of reasons.

14. Are there any processes involved to determine the success of the museum shop, such as feedback and evaluation from customers?

Not specifically for the Shop at the moment. The museum has a feedback form at the Front Desk for visitors in general.

15. If you don’t mind us asking, how do you reinvest the finances made from the museum shop back into the shop and other areas of the museum?

By spending it on repurchase of stock and directly supporting the operation of the Museum.

16. What are your plans for the future?

To continue to refine our data for planning purposes and develop an E Shop when we have sufficient staff and storage areas.

117

Appendix 8 -Ethnographic analysis Tourists Question 1: What was the purpose of your visit today?

Table 11- Purpose of tourist visit

Question 2: Compared to other archaeological sites, what stands out as unique or different about Kerameikos?

People constantly referred to the natural aspect of the site as something very special and unique. Themes such as quiet, peaceful, not crowded which allowed for a connection between the visitor and nature where they could appreciate the flora and fauna in Kerameikos. Some visitors appreciated the feeling of freedom that the site allowed them to experience.

The diversity of the structures in the site, and on display in the museum, effectively represent many different time periods in history.

For a lot of the tourists, Kerameikos represents ancient life, society and economy. It is a different site because of the narratives that it tells, narratives that are not so much concentrated around the gods and their worship as so many other sites tend to depict. This is what makes Kerameikos unique.

The content inside the site makes it very different from many other archaeological sites in the world. The cemetery, funerary practices, graves and tomb stones are often the things that stand out to visitors who have not experienced many, if any, sites that show these similarities. The tombstone reconstructions in-situ are a powerful visual tool that give the sense of Kerameikos coming to life, creating an interaction with life and death.

118

Some other points of importance include the ancient gates inside the site which mark the entrance to the ancient city of Athens, and the defensive long walls that run through the site. These defences played a very crucial role for Athens and the site itself is situated in an extremely important location historically.

Question 3: What would you like to see more of on the site?

Table 12- Tourists recommendations for what they would like to see at Kerameikos

Question 4: Please write down three words that describe your experience today

Word written Number of people Word written Number of people Relaxing 8 Interesting 16 Calm 5 Informative 7 Natural 5 Historical 6 Beautiful 5 Unexpected/surprising 4 Peaceful 3 Ancient/ruins 3 Bucolic 2 Fascinating 3 Educational 2 Death 2

Table 13- tourists experiences

119

These six words can all be assumed to represent the natural beauty of the site which evokes feelings of peace and tranquillity. The natural value of Kerameikos is clearly one that many visitors recognise.

This group of words all say something about the content within the site and museum of Kerameikos, and represent the educational, historical and narratives that are imbedded within the site.

Some other words that were mentioned only once include: sad, moving, authentic, mysterious, touching, connected, inspirational, and intriguing. Most of these show the powerful emotions that Kerameikos is able to evoke in visitors.

Question 5: What is your impression of the area surrounding the archaeological site?

Table 14- Tourists impressions of Kerameikos

Question 6: Is there anything about Kerameikos that is representative of another site that you have visited in your country, or anywhere outside of Greece?

For this question many people chose sites that reminded them either of the natural aspect of Kerameikos or the cemetery and funerary link. These were the two main themes of Kerameikos that people consistently thought of when they were trying to make comparisons with other sites around the world.

The following locations were mentioned:

Italy; Rome, Pompeii

Turkey; Pammukale, Myra, Pergamon

France; Paris

120

Jordan

Tunisia; Carthage

Germany; Berlin

Peru

UK; Dublin

Palestine

Argentina; Buenos Aires

Czech Republic; Prague

Romania

Questions 7, 8, 9, 10: Which of the following set of opposite words would you select regarding Kerameikos?

121

Table

Table 15- Tourists general feelings of Kerameikos

Question 11: Would it benefit you if the site and the surrounding area had more facilities? Please select from the following:

Table 16- Tourists opinions of what could benefit Kerameikos

Question 12: What do you consider as a form of art inside Kerameikos?

Common answers to this question include:

Sculpture

122

Tombstones

Pottery/vase paintings

Architecture

Museum artefacts

Garden/landscape

Statues

The entire site

Question 13: Is there anything that represents religion in or near the archaeological site?

The common answers taken from this question were: the nearby church, the tombs inside the site, funerary practices and the beginning of the sacred way. However, there were a significant number of answers that contradicted each other, for example; ‘there was nothing religious about the site” and “everything about the site was religious’, which indicates that religion in general, or recognising religion, has different meanings for different people.

Question 14: Are there any negative aspects of the site?

Table 17- Tourists opinion of negative aspects of the site

Question 15: Age

123

Table 18- Tourists ages

Question 16: Nationality

The majority of people who visited the site were from Europe, those countries being Slovakia, Germany, United Kingdom and France. However, there were also a few Americans who had a high number of visits to the site.

Question 17: Level of education

Table 19-Tourists level of education

Question 18: Occupation

People from many different professions had visited the site; however many of the visitors were predominantly students. Other professions that were common included: archaeologists, teachers, engineers or business professionals. Many of the visitors were also retired.

124

Greek Interviews Aggregated results from Ethnographic Project which took place on May 2015 by Master’s students of Heritage Management

1. Kerameikos Visit

YES 13/14 92.86%

NO 1/14 7.14%

Table 20-Number of locals who visited Kerameikos

2. Last visit

0-1 9/14 64.29%

1-3 2/14 14.29%

3-6 0/14 0.00%

6-10 0/14 0.00%

10+ 2/14 14.29%

Table 21- Locals last visit to Kerameikos

3. Have you noticed changes in the archaeological area or in the surrounding area?

Changes 9/14 64.29%

Do not change 5/14 64.29%

Table 22- Locals who recognise Kerameikos’ changes

Changes:  New excavations due to Olympic Games  Pedestrian street, buildings  Promotion of the site, it was degraded but now emerges  Derelict pedestrian  More cars  Dirty greens  Junk heaps  Missing benches

125

 Unkempt area  Vast changes, nice fenced, draws the attention of passers by  Metaxourgeio is upgraded  On the outside it has changed more

4. Did you like / enjoy the archaeological site more before the fence? YES 2/14 14.29%

NO 8/14 57.14%

DK / NA 5/14 35.71%

Table 23-Number of locals who enjoyed Kerameikos before the fence

5. What is your opinion for the fence?

Answers

 Blocks contact with the archaeological sites but it is necessary, I would prefer something more natural, for example Bushes which are more discreet  More compatible with the environment and aesthetics of the site  Pretty good, discreet, protects against vandalism  We need it, to not use the site as a toilet  The archaeological site is not distinct  Partly it is necessary to protect the area, but could be more discreet  The fence protects, highlights and separates it as a distinct space  Reminds of prison, I would prefer glass in order to be more accessible visually  Necessary fencing for safety. If this can be ensured by an alternative fence then any proposal is welcomed  I prefer it, fencing protects our antiquities  Very good fence, I think with the fence the site is more noticeable  I like it, it’s just fine  Now the site is protected and highlighted  Without fence = free, with the fence =access is limited / closed. Why do they close off the antiquities? Should there not be a free ticket for the Greeks

126

6. What of the following represents the Kerameikos? In memoriam 2/32 6.25%

Glory of Athens 7/32 21.88%

Art / Pottery 8/32 25.00%

Religion 4/32 12.50%

Cemetery 6/32 18.75%

Funeral Speech of Pericles 5/32 15.63%

Other: Archaeological Site / 1/32 3.13% Museum Pottery

Table 24- Locals opinions of what Kerameikos represents

7A. Do you recall your last visit to the site, how would you describe your experience?

(From a scale 1 to 5, with 1 meaning less and 5 meaning the most)

Passive Interactive

1 2 3 4 5

3 1 5 2 1

25.00% 8.33% 41.67% 16.67% 8.33%

Non educational Very educational

1 2 3 4 5

2 1 4 3 2

16.67% 8.33% 33.33% 25.00% 16.67%

127

Boring Interesting

1 2 3 4 5

0 0 3 3 6

0,00% 0,00% 25,00% 25,00% 50,00%

Table 25-Locals general feelings of Kerameikos

7B. Recalling the last time you visited the site, how would you describe your experience?

DK / NA 4/14 28.57%

Negative 1/14 7.14%

Positive 8/14 57.14%

Neutral 1/14 7.14%

Table 26- Locals description of last visit to Kerameikos

 Neutral  Positive, because I'm influenced by Plato's Academy where many events took place, so I like these things  Educational and interactive enough  Lovely, quiet, creative  Last time I had come to attend a programme for elementary students. It was very interesting to observe the student’s reactions and their interest in the space.  Positive, would recommend it to others  Positive  The presence of the museum is positive  It would have been good if the site had a tourist guide  Positive experience.

128

8. Which of the following do you think would enhance your experience at the archaeological site? Temporary exhibitions 7/40 17.50%

Live music / dance performances 6/40 15.00%

Theatrical performances 6/40 15.00%

Lectures archeological 10/40 25.00%

Tutorials 5/40 12.50%

Other: Information, something that triggers the 1/40 2.50% imagination

Tourist Guide 3/40 7.50%

Unification of Kerameikos archaeological site 1/40 2.50% with Elefsina

Interpretative headphones 1/40 2.50%

Table 27- Locals opinions of what would enhance Kerameikos

9. What would you like to in the archaeological site?

Three-dimensional reconstructions 10/44 22.73%

Artistic representations 5/44 11.36%

Small replicas 5/44 11.36%

Reconstructed buildings 4/44 9.09%

Interactive new technology applications 5/44 11.36%

Educational programs for all ages 8/44 18.18%

Shop 6/44 13.64%

Nothing 0/44 0.00%

Other: Better semi-destroyed than “patched” 1/44 ??????

Table 28- Locals recommendations for what they would like to see in Kerameikos

129

12. If the archaeological site was not in the position it is today, what would be different in the area?

13. How would you feel about that?

 Everything, a building would have been built and that would dishearten you. I would feel very bad because every piece of our history is our soul.  Lack of knowledge of our history, we would lack a bit of green and we would lose a piece that makes us remember the past. I would feel regret.  Less green, I would feel disappointed.  Housing. I’ll feel bad.  It would be full of buildings and cafes so I wish to remain that way for many years. Unhappiness because they remind us who we are and what our past is.  It would lack the natural environment and bio reserve. A great regret.  It would not be nice, romantic and appealing. I would feel strange, lack of magic.  It would be one bad urbanized area and degraded.  It would obviously be full of buildings  Anarchy  Lack in our history. Zero. It would also be this part of the city.  I would like park with trees, sheds for sun and rain, water and toilets.  Apartment buildings and roads  Probably in the area, buildings would have been built and there would be a lack of open space.

14. Interviewees Age

Age >18 0/14 0.00% 18-25 2/14 14.29% 26-35 2/14 14.29% 36-45 2/14 14.29% 46-55 3/14 21,43% 56-65 4/14 28.57% 66+ 1/14 7.14%

Table 29- Locals ages

130

Nationality

Greek 14/14

Employment

Student 3/14 21,43% Engineer / 1/14 7.14% Engineer Versatile 1/14 7.14% Freelance 1/14 7.14% Retired 3/14 21,43% Archaeologist 1/14 7.14% Professor 2/14 14.29% Private Employee 2/14 14.29%

Table 30- Locals occupations

Educational qualifications

Municipal 0/14 0.00% Middle School / High School 4/14 28.57% University / TEI 5/14 35.71% Master 3/14 21, 43% PhD 1/14 7.14%

14 filled Greek questionnaires

Q1: Have you ever visited Kerameikos?

Most of the people who filled out our questionnaires have visited Kerameikos a least once in their lifetime.

Q2: When was the last time you visited the place?

Concerning the higher percentage of people who answered it was during the last year and an equal percentage of 14, 29% had visited the site between 1-3 years and 10 or more years (respectively).

131

Q3: Have you noticed any changes inside the archaeological site or outside in the wider area?

More than half of the people (64, 29%) answered that they have noticed some changes both in the wider area and the site. A smaller number of people (35, 71%) haven’t noticed anything changed; something that can be easily justified since most of them have recently moved in the area.

The changes mentioned concern mostly the external environment and they can be divided into two categories; positive and negative. The most positive ones are the new excavations, the pedestrianisation of Ermou street, the renovation of old neoclassical buildings, the fencing of the site –which is nice and catches the attention of the passengers–, and lastly the redevelopment of Metaxourgeio. Despite the upgrade, there are people who consider the pedestrian and the region around as neglected and dirty, lacks rubbish bins, benches and trees along the side of the pedestrian.

Q4: Did you like/enjoy the archaeological site before the fencing?

A very small percentage of 14.29% answered ‘yes’, 57.14% answered ‘no’, while 35% and 71% had a neutral response.

Q5: What do you think about the fencing?

When asked to express their opinion about the fencing, people gave various answers. Most of them were positively disposed towards the fence because it protects the antiquities from vandalism, and helps the site to be clean and be more noticeable as it is separated from the area around. A few people were clearly against it, justifying their answer by saying that the site is not discernible, it looks like a jail and it gives the sense of restriction. Quite a few agreed with the idea of fencing, but they preferred an alternative fence, something more discreet like glass, hedge, or another material matching more with the aesthetics of the site or the material the site has been made of. Among the comments, we had one connected with the fact that the fence obliges you to pay a ticket in order to enter the site and this should not apply for Greeks (‘Greeks should not need to pay for tickets!’)

132

Q6: Which of the following is representative about Kerameikos?

From the set of words available for the responders, the higher percentage (25%) answered ‘art and ceramics’, 21.88% answered ‘the glory of Athens’, 18.75% identify the site with the cemetery, 15.63% link the place with the ‘epitaph of Pericles’, 12.50% find a connection with ‘religious affairs’ and 6.25% believe that symbolises the ‘hysterophemia’. One person mentioned that it represents a ceramics museum.

Q7a: Bringing back memories of your last visit to the site, how would you describe the experience offered?

Between a scale of 1-5 where 1 corresponds to ‘passive’ and 5 ‘interactive’, 41.47% circled no3 (neutral), 25% circled no1, 16.67% circled no4, no2 and no5 was been chosen by 8.33% each. The same scale was set for ‘non-educational’ to ‘educational’, in which 33.33% chose no3 (neutral), 25% marked no4, no1 and no5 was chosen by 16.67% each and 8.33% chose no2. Again, in a scale of 1-5 where 1 stands for ‘boring’ and 5 ‘interesting’, 50% answered ‘interesting’; no3 and no4 took 25% each.

Half of the questionnaires released had the same question as open-ended. This question (Q7b) was phrased exactly the same but with no possible answers.

Q7b: Bringing back memories of your last visit, how would you describe the experience offered?

A percentage of 57,.14% answered positively, 7.14% answer negatively and 28. 57% belong to the category of neutral responses.

From those answered positively, the most prevailing answers included the words: educational, calm, creative, interactive, worth suggesting. From those negatively disposed, it was mentioned that the presence of a guide would be good both for students and the elderly public.

133

Q8: Which of the following would enhance the experience offered in the archaeological site?

From the set of possible answers given, 25% were interested in attending archaeological lectures, theatrical plays and music/dance shows were chosen by 15% each, 17.50% would like to see periodical exhibitions and 12.50% were interested in educational programs. Some other answers given were: proper update/communication-something to fire the imagination, the presence of a guide, unification (urban or context) between other archaeological sites (like Elefsina) and guided tours with headphones.

Q9: What else would you like the site to have?

3D representations are gaining ground the last few years and this is also obvious in this ethnographic research since it was chosen by most people filled in our questionnaires. Educational programs for both school children and adults are second in order of preference and a museum shop comes as the third most desired option. The next three equally preferred options were: artistic representations, models and interactive new technology applications. Reconstructed buildings come last in preference and someone commented that ‘it is better to be semi-destructed rather than reconstructed’.

Q10: Are there any negative points concerning the area around the site?

From the options given, most of the people answered that there is no proper signposting (44%). Some others (24%) believe that the lack of more open entrances is also a drawback, while a percentage of 20% find the lack of available parking space as a negative thing. The lack of commercial zone was barely chosen by the 8% of the respondents. One person wrote as a comment the lack of information and promotion about the site.

Q11: Choose whichever from the following you believe would be beneficial for the area around the archaeological site.

‘Pottery workshops’ was chosen by 42.11%. ‘Restaurants’ and ‘Souvenir shops’, were both chosen by 10.53% each; ‘Café’ and ‘Kiosks’, were also chosen by 5.26% each. 21.05% ticked the option of ‘no shops at all’ and lastly we had a comment saying that ‘it would be interesting to utilize the buildings around’.

134

Q12: What would be different if the archaeological site wasn’t there?

Q13: How would you feel about it?

(These two questions were obviously separate but they were answered as one. Basically, in most of the cases Q12 was not even answered.)

From the total 14 answers, three of them were clearly referred to the natural value of the area around the site and the site itself. The prevailing feelings expressed in those answers were that of disappointment and sadness because there would be lack of green space and natural range. Four more respondants mentioned that if it were not for the archaeological site, the area would be an urbanized and deprived area, full of concrete, high block of flats and shops. Those answers are also connected implicitly with the need of open, green spaces in the city centre and the feeling related with the idea of the lack of this ‘luxury’ would be, again, sorrow because the place would not be as nice, romantic and attractive as it is now. ‘There would be lack of magic!’ All the other answers concerned the historic value of the site. People noted down that in case of the scenario of the site not being there, we would not be aware of our history and this means that a part of ourselves and our past would be missing. Antiquities remind us of who we are, who our ancestors were, and what their lives were like. ‘Our history is our soul’, someone wrote, and the feelings that the lack of the site would generate are sorrow and emptiness since this is also a part of the city. Many of those who emphasized the history of the place also made links with the natural value, so the historic value exists exactly because the area is not built up. A person simply noted the word ‘anarchy’, that anarchy would ensue if there was not an archaeological site, and someone else wrote that if the site didn’t exist he would prefer the place to be a park with trees, sheds, sweet water and toilets.

135

Appendix 9 Evaluation museum store performance

‘In order to measure how well a museum store is supporting the mission of the museum itself, more subjective measure are needed, especially if the mission is largely educational because objective measures are expensive and problematic’ (Mottner,2007 :148). These subjective measures can be seen below and should be implemented after the first month of the museum shop being opened.

1. The products in the store helped me to understand the museum’s collection/subject matter better

2. The store promoted the museum’s collection/subject matter

3. The prices in the store reflected the quality of the products

4. The store’s location was near the museum’s collection

5. When I bought something from the store I felt like I was taking ‘a parting of the museum’ with me

6. The people in the store helped me to remember my museum visit

7. The displays in the store helped me to remember the items I saw in the museum

8. The museum store seemed very organised

136

Appendix 10 Shop Location Proposals

137

Values relating to the heritage shop It is crucial that any intervention or addition to a heritage site does not take away any of the values that the site contains, nor should it distract the visitor from the main site. The focus must always remain on the site itself. A heritage shop is not simply a gift shop with the primary goal of financial return; rather it has other necessary obligations to reflect what the site itself represents and to fulfil the educational mission of the site through the products that it sells (Kovach, 2014: 15). In a sense the shop is an extension of the museum or site and should continue this role by contributing further to educate (Kovach, 2014: 6), inspire, promote and remind people of their experience of the visit.

The heritage shop will be another avenue from which to promote the values of Kerameikos and to educate visitors on understanding these values contained within the site. The aim is not to compete with the site, but rather to enhance it.

Visibility of a museum shop The visibility of the shop should be an obvious thing to consider which will ensure that visitors know of its existence. This is one of the fundamental mistakes of the current shop at Kerameikos as the shop is located behind the ticket counter and unless you know it is there, you are unlikely to notice it. The shop should be set up in the most heavily trafficked place in the museum or site, generally near the entrance and exit, which will help in maximising sales (Mottner, 2007: 8; 146). Signposting for the shop is also something very simple and effective to create awareness (Prescott, 2003: 2). This will also give the shop a chance to create its own identity and brand name, the importance of which was discussed in previous chapters.

Shop size The size of the shop is determined by the type and amount of products being sold. A shop that is too small may result in an uncomfortable lack of space for the visitors, poor displays of stock and prices, and generally an aesthetically unpleasant environment which may turn off potential shoppers. On the other hand if the shop is too large it will force products to be spread out to cover the space, which gives the impression that the shop does not have enough stock and is going out of business (Prescott, 2003: 2). This leads into an analysis of the interior environment of the shop and how this space influences the overall experience of the visitor, emphasised in much detail already.

138

Another problem with the current shop at Kerameikos is its location behind the ticket booth where the limited space greatly restricts the amount of objects they are able to stock. A new shop will alleviate these issues.

Relationship between shop and site It is pertinent that a museum shop somehow shows its relationship with the museum it is selling products for; otherwise there is no distinguishing a museum shop from a regular souvenir shop (Macdonald, 2012: 45), and even though our proposed shop is a heritage shop relating to the entire site of Kerameikos and not exactly a museum shop, the same principles apply. Because of this, the nearer the heritage shop location is to the heritage site itself, the better. It will be much easier to establish a connection between site and shop if the building exists inside the site or directly outside of it. In that case certain design features can be added to the shop such as large glass windows that provide a view of the archaeological site and light up the interior of the shop at the same time. These are features that are best planned in collaboration with an architect.

Separating shop and site It is also important that the shop needs to be clearly defined as separate from the site or museum itself. According to the some of the research that has been done on the behaviour of museum shop visitors, one common action is the desire to touch the items (Kent, 2010: 74-75, Macdonald, 2010: 49; 52). Macdonald alludes to this as one stage on the path to possessing the item and that this behaviour is exacerbated by the strict museum environment where usually no touching is allowed until visitors enter into the museum shop where touching is encouraged (Macdonald, 2010: 49; 52). Making a distinction between shop and site is necessary to prevent confusion as visitors need to know the appropriate way to behave and although some museum shops, such as the Grenville Room in the British Museum, may benefit from a shop that looks like an exhibit, this is not an advisable strategy for the heritage shop at Kerameikos which will likely offer a variety of different products at different prices.

Further benefits can be exploited by providing access to the shop even without having to buy an entry ticket to the site. A good example of this is in the new Acropolis Museum, which allows people to visit both shops and the upstairs café without the need to purchase a ticket. This will allow for further revenue, especially if the museum shop builds a good reputation by selling unique, educational and meaningful products.

139

Location involving the community A project such as this is not just about making money in order to help preserve and protect the archaeological site for future generations. There are many other benefits that come with setting up a heritage shop in the Kerameikos area, which includes involving the local community in such a way that it will remain in the best interest of everyone if the site is preserved indefinitely (Coben, 2014: 281). Selling products that are designed and made by local craftsmen will ensure that our products are high quality, handmade, unique, value based and products that relate directly to the area of Kerameikos. This will help to establish a strong connection between the local community and the archaeological site, a connection that currently appears to be absent, according to our rapid ethnographic research.

By supporting local craftsmen, artists, authors and other interested members of the community around Kerameikos, and once they realise the potential economic benefits that the archaeological site can provide, this community will better understand the importance of continued preservation and promotion of this asset for the future (Timothy, 2014: 43). This can only help to ensure a sustainable scenario for the future in terms of preserving the heritage site, involving the community for their own economic and social benefits as well as creating more jobs, ancillary revenues and perhaps fostering a greater sense of cultural identity for the surrounding area (Coben, 2014: 281). If the local community can better experience all the benefits that a heritage shop at a heritage site such as Kerameikos can offer them, they might become more active as protectors and promoters of that heritage.

According to these parameters, and to our own research of the site and surrounding area, we have come up with the four best locations where a heritage shop might be established. Two of these locations are inside the archaeological site itself and the other two are directly outside.

140

141

Location one: This clearing space is rather fortunate because it serves as the perfect location for a heritage shop for a number of reasons. First, the space already exists and it is outside Kerameikos archaeological site, which means that no intervention inside the site is necessary. Second, this area is directly outside the main entrance into the site so that it is easily visible and accessible for all visitors going to the site and also anyone passing by. Third, because the location is outside the site, people not visiting the archaeological site can still access the shop without having to buy an entry ticket. Fourth, having the shop location outside the boundary of the archaeological site allows so much more leeway in terms of construction, permits, law and legislative restrictions, staffing, products and an overall greater freedom when it comes to choices for the heritage shop. One negative aspect of using this space is that there is no existing building here. This means going through the expensive process of designing and constructing a new building from scratch.

142

143

144

Location two: An obvious location for a museum shop is inside, or directly connected to, the museum itself. The proposed second location for a Kerameikos shop utilises the open courtyard just outside the museum’s entrance, a place that is large enough for a new structure and easily visible for visitors as they approach the museum. As it is, the courtyard is not currently being used to its full potential. There are some artefacts there under the protection of the roof, but they are outside the actual museum building; in fact they are in a rather strange limbo, neither museum artefacts nor in-situ objects. Establishing a heritage shop here has the advantage of utilising this space and being connected with the museum. However, some potential problems are created when constructing or adding to a structure inside an archaeological site. This will no doubt involve much discussion with a number of different parties including the Ministry of Culture, the archaeological service and the Third Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities.

This also means that the shop will be completely under the authority of the Ministry of Culture and as such must adhere to the rules and regulations of TAP with regards to the products being sold. The Ministry will also appoint their own staff to manage and run the shop.

145

146

Location three: Location three has much of the same pros and cons as location two in that it is also inside the archaeological site, will also require additions to the current structure (the ticket booth), and also has space to offer. In fact the current shop for the site is actually inside the ticket booth, but as there is no signage or other indication of this, it is very hard to notice its existence. A more obvious shop in this location would ensure that many more visitors enter and browse what is available. Another potential problem with this location is that it is not in the most heavily trafficked area unlike the space outside the museum which is both close to the museum entrance and the site entrance/exit.

147

148

Location four: Ancient Messini Study Centre - Messinian Archaeological Studies Company

On 33 Psaromiligkou Street there is a neoclassical building located just outside the second entrance of the archaeological site of Kerameikos. The majority of the buildings of that street belong to the Ministry of Culture (so the area is ideal for establishing organizations of cultural interest) and some others are unexploited.

The positives of the building are:

1. Two-story building with appropriate space in terms of size in order to properly place the various objects and to ensure equal distribution of these objects.

2. It is located right next to the archaeological site of Kerameikos meaning that the visitor has a clear line of sight when entering or exiting.

3. The only cost incurred is the undergoing renovations of the interior to accommodate the needs of the shop and some expenses for maintenance to the external face, which in general is in very good condition. This money is much less than it would be needed to build a brand new building inside or outside the archaeological site.

The negatives of the building are:

1. The building currently houses the Ancient Messini Study Centre which belongs to the Messinian Archaeological Studies Company.

2. The proposal of changing the identity of the building brings a series of bureaucratic procedures with the Ministry of Culture as well as the existing company whose interests will been raised.

3. The second entrance to the archaeological site has long since been closed and entrance to the site is not permitted to visitors from that gate. After speaking with an employee there, he explained that the second gate is used only for unloading materials for maintenance work being conducted at the area and that the ministry does not have the money required to pay another employee to man this entrance.

The proposal for the specific building, despite the negatives noted above, is put forward because the building on 33 Psaromiligkou Street is ideal to house an organization which has some relevance or connection with the surrounding area. Most archaeological sites are surrounded by institutions and businesses relevant to what that particular archaeological

149 site stands for. So, the Ancient Messini Study Centre should be situated in an area near Ancient Messini, which is located in the southwest of the Peloponnese, rather than its current location near the archeological site of Kerameikos with which it has no connection in terms of research.

Another suggestion could be that the two parties, the shop and the study centre, both share the building in proportion according to the needs that each has. This solution would result in avoiding complex, time-consuming bureaucratic procedures, but will also be considered an act of goodwill for finding a solution that pleases everyone involved.

150

151

Appendix 11 Resources and Capabilities

Figure 13- Resources and Capabilities

The resources for Kerameikos have been categorized into tangible, intangible and human. With these resources they can be used as an organisation’s capabilities and with them a strategy can be formed, which leads to competitive advantage. From the diagram, Kerameikos has many resources, which lead to capabilities. The success factors are how we differentiate ourselves from the competition and how to maintain this. The competitive advantage we have over others is that our resources relate to our values and stakeholders.

152

Appendix 12 Stakeholders Table – Museums in Athens Publi Privat a/a Museum Address Type Shop c e Alex Mylona - Macedonian Contemporary 1 5 Agion Asomaton Sq., 1554 √ √ Museum of Contemporary Art Art Study Centre of Traditional 2 4 Melidoni St., 10553 Art √ Pottery 3 Museum of Islamic Art 22 Agion Asomaton, 105 53 Art √ √ 31 Agion Asomaton St., 105 4 Museum of Political Exile Historical √ 53 5 Herakleidon Museum Herakleidon 16, 11851 culture √ √ Central Athens Dionysiou Aeropagitou 15, 6 Acropolis Museum Archaeological √ √ 11742 Archaeological Museum of 7 Ermou 148 Archaeological √ √ Kerameikos 8 Epigraphical Museum Tositsa 1, 10682 Archaeological √ Goulandris Museum of 9 Neofitou Douka 4, 10674 Archaeological √ √ Cycladic Art 10 Museum of the Ancient Agora Adrianou 24, 10555 Archaeological √ √ Museum of the Center for the 2-4 Makriyianni street, 11 Archaeological √ √ Acropolis Studies Athens National Archaeological 12 28th October 44, 10682 Archaeological √ √ Museum of Athens Numismatic Museum of leoforos Eleytheriou 13 Archaeological √ Athens official site Venizelou 12, 10671 Syntagma Metro Station Syntagma Sq. inside the 14 Archaeological √ Archaeological Collection metro Byzantine and Christian Vasilissis Sofias (next to Byzantine, 15 √ Museum (of Athens) the War Museum) Ecclesiastic 16 Benaki Museum Piraios 138, 11854 Multi √ √ Eleftherios Venizelos 17 Eleftherias Park Historical √ Historical Museum 18 Jewish Museum of Greece Nikis 39, Athens Ethnic √ Museum of Pavlos and Theorias 12 and Panos, 19 Historical √ √ Alexandra Kanellopoulou Plaka, 10555 20 Museum of the City of Athens Parnassou 2, Athens City √ √

153

Publi Privat a/a Museum Address Type Shop c e National Historical Museum 21 of Greece (Old Parliament Stadiou 13, 10521 Historical √ √ House) Centre for the Study of 22 Melidoni 4, 10553 Folklore √ √ Traditional Pottery Ilias Lalaounis Jewelry 23 Kallisperi 12, 11742 Folklore √ √ Museum 24 Museum of Greek Folk Art Kydathinaion 17, 10558 Folklore √ √ Museum of Popular Music 25 Diogenous 1-3, 10556 Folklore √ √ Instruments Museum of the History of the 26 Dimokritou 7, 10671 Folklore √ Greek Costume 27 Athinais Culture Center Kastorias 34, 10447 Culture √ Bernier-Iliadis Gallery 28 Eptachalkou 11, 11851 Gallery √ Museum 29 City of Athens Cultural Center Akadimias 50, 10679 Cultural Centre √ Design Museum of the 20th 30 Patmou 4-8, 15123 Popular Art √ Century 31 Frissiras Museum Monis Asteriou 3 & 7, 10558 Popular Art √ √

Gounaropoulou 6 & 32 Gounaropoulos Museum Popular Art √ √ Frygias, Ano Ilisia, 16231 Museum of Engravings and Aghias Philotheis Street 10, 33 Art museum √ Graphic Arts Metropoleos Square 34 Marika Kotopouli Museum Panagouli 10, 15773 Art √ √ Melina Merkouri Cultural 35 Herakleidon 66, 11851 Cultural Center √ Center 36 Municipal Gallery of Athens Koumoundourou 51, 10436 Gallery √ √ 37 National Glyptotheque Alsos Stratou Goudi, 11525 Glyptotheque √ National Museum of Leoforos Kallirois & Amvr. Contemporary 38 √ √ Contemporary Art, Athens Frantzi, 11743 Art 39 Paxinou-Minotis Museum Menandrou 52, 10431 Art √ Pieridis Museum of Ancient vassileos georgiou a' 40 Cypriot Greek Art & Art √ avenue 28, 16675 Contemporary Art

154

Publi Privat a/a Museum Address Type Shop c e The N. Chatzikiriakos-Gkikas 41 Kriezotou 3, 10671 Gallery √ Art Gallery 42 Technopolis (Gazi) Pireos kai Voutadon, 11854 Culture √ √

43 Theatrical Museum of Greece Akadimias 50, Athens Theater √ 44 Zoumboulaki Gallery kriezotou 7, 10671 Gallery √ √ Maritime, 45 Athens War Museum Vasilissis Sofias , 10675 √ Military Railway, 46 Railway Museum of Athens Liosion 301, 10445 Science, √ Technology Museum of Anthropology, 47 Mikras Asias 75, 11527 Anthropology √ University of Athens Museum of Geology and 48 Paleontology of the Athens Oulof Palme, 15772 Geology √ University Zoological Museum of the 49 Oulof Palme, 15773 Zoological √ University of Athens Children, Education, Special 50 Interests, Sports, University 51 Athens University Museum Tholou 5, 10556 Folklore √ √ 52 Hellenic Children's Museum Kidathinaion 14, 10558 Art √ √ Postal & Philatelic Museum Postal & 53 Stadiou 5 √ of Greece Philatelic Museum of Greek Children’s 54 Kodrou 9, 10558 Art √ √ Art (M.G.C.A.) 55 North Athens Deste Foundation (exhibition Contemporary 56 Philellinon 11, 14234 √ area) Art Agion Theodoron & D. 57 Drossinis Museum Art √ Kiriakou,14562 Vasilissis Sofias & 58 Spathario Museum Folklore √ Dimitriou Ralli, 11363 Yiannis Tsarouchis 59 Ploutarhou 28, Athens Art museum √ √ Foundation Museum OTE Museum of Telecommunic 60 Proteos 19, 11364 √ Telecommunications, Kifisia ations

155

Publi Privat a/a Museum Address Type Shop c e

61 Gaia Center Distomou 9, 15125 Natural History √ √

Goulandris Natural History 62 Levidiou 13, 14562 Natural History √ √ Museum South Athens Planetarium 63 Evgenidio Foundation Leoforos Siggrou 379, 17564 and Science √ museum Greek armored cruiser Marina Floisvos 64 Maritime √ Georgios Averof Trokantero, 17510 65 Tactual Museum of Athens Doiranis 198, 17673 √ Piraeus regional unit Archaeological Museum of 66 Harilaou Trikoupi 31, 18536 Archaeological √ Piraeus Municipal Art Gallery of Iroon Polutechniou 91, 67 Gallery Piraeus 18536 Panos Aravantinos Decor Agios Constantine 2, 68 Art museum √ Museum Peraeus Electric Railways Museum of 69 Odyssou Square Railway √ Piraeus Hellenic Maritime Museum Akti themistokleous 12, 70 Maritime √ (Piraeus) 18536 Islands regional unit Archaeological Museum of 71 Aigina, 18010 Archaeological √ Aegina Archaeological Museum of 72 Poros Archaeological √ Poros Archaeological Museum of 73 Kythira Archaeological √ Kythera Pavlos Kountouriotis 74 Hydra, Greece Folklore √ Mansion, Hydra (Greek) 75 Spetses Museum Dapia, Spetses, 18050 Folklore √ West Attica Archaeological Museum of 76 Eleusina 19200 Archaeological √ Eleusis Archaeological Museum of 77 Menidiati 48, 19100 Archaeological √ Megara Skironio Museum 50th km of old main road, 78 Art museums √ Polychronopoulos 19100 East Attica Archaeological Museum of Filadelfias 76, 13671 79 Acharnes (part of Folk Art Archaeological √ Acharne Museum of Acharnes) Archaeological Museum of Markopoulo Mesoyaias 190 80 Archaeological √ Brauron 03, Attika

156

Publi Privat a/a Museum Address Type Shop c e Archaeological Museum of 81 Layrio 19500 Archaeological √ Lavrion Archaeological Museum of 82 Plataion 114, Vranas, 19007 Archaeological √ Marathon Athens International Airport International Airport √ 83 Archaeological Archaeological Collection "Elefterios Venizelos", Schimatari Archaeological Spata 84 Tanagra 38, 32009 Archaeological √ Museum Filadelfias 76, 13671 85 Folk Art Museum of Acharnes Folklore √ Acharne 86 Zygomalas Museum, Avlonas 190 11 Avlón, Attiki Folklore √ √ Diadohou Konstantinou 1, 87 Vorres Museum, Paiania Folklore √ 19002 Phaethon Technological 36th km Leoforos 88 Museum (car museum) Markopoulou - Oropou, Technology √ (Kalamos) official site greek 19015 Mineralogical Museum of 89 Lavreotiki 19500 Geological √ Lavrion

Table 31- Detailed stakeholders table of museums in Athens

Appendix 12- Branding and Logo

The following branding strategy was created with inspiration from the ‘Brand New Thinking’ workshop held in Athens, 2015; led by Frances Croxford and Louise McKinney from The Seeking State.

Kerameikos- ‘The Circle of life’

Finding the identity, personality, provocation, relevance and reinvention can create initial ideas for the branding campaign.

• Identity - Kerameikos redefines culture as ‘the circle of life’, forever expanding and continuing. Hope to inspire all other heritage shops in Greece to encompass the values of their site in their shop. To become leaders in the sector. (Vision)

• Personality - Hope to create a relationship between customers and site, while visiting. This is done to complete the circle of ‘explore, educate and engage’ (mission). To not lose the focus of the values in the products, and to create a brand that never that loses authenticity and integrity.

157

• Provocation - How to break the habit, fill the gap of Kerameikos to ‘Educate’ to complete the experience of the visitor; not break our habit but break the habit of customers. Think with a different perspective. Be collaborative and listen to what others have to say about Kerameikos. Listen and build on other’s ideas and turn the negatives into positives.

• Relevance - Commercialisation is a part of everyday life an use this to achieve our goals; to promote the values of Kerameikos through the common language of commercialisation. Kerameikos is relevant because it is ‘the circle of life’.

• Reinvention - To put Kerameikos’ values on par with other more visited and well known archaeological sites in Athens in order to try and unify the values between the sites because the ancient sites of Athens cannot be considered as separate from one another; they were and still are as one. Reinvent Kerameikos as part of all the other archaeological sites in Athens. Some claim that when it comes to culture you cannot have new ideas, our hope is to expand and reinvent the products continuously and not to lose the values of Kerameikos.

The heritage shop contains the fundamentals of this and enhances this expanding ‘circle of life’.

Challenges and opportunities – Using these moulds to shape the branding campaign idea

1. What is the point of Reinvention? What is wrong with the world? We live in an era of commercialisation where everything is defined by brand and status, and this is the intangible common language of the people nowadays.

2. Relevance - what can we do about it? Kerameikos represents the continuation of life; then, now and in the future. It is a representation of the circle of life. We can present this through different means in our heritage shop and brand the heritage shop in such a way that it can communicate with the common language of commercialisation.

3. Personality – what is our value? We take into account our stakeholder’s needs and allow them to engage with Kerameikos and our shop on all levels. We are respectful to all the values of the archaeological site. With this we do not lose focus on our vision.

4. Purpose - why do we exist? We wish to disrupt the status quo of the typical heritage shop in Greece; to break the habit of selling a meaningless product and to break visitor’s habit of only seeing and learning about the site; allowing them instead to have a physical continuity of the museum/site experience, through a meaningful heritage shop product.

158

Process of brand building

In applying the above processes we can implement the following in our branding campaign:

• Deconstruct and disrupt (4)

• Create and communicate (2)

• Articulate and engage (1&3)

Creating a branding procedure is unnecesary at the given time since it is more crucial to create an identity for the heritage shop of Kerameikos, in order to establish Kerameikos’ presence within Athens.

159

Logo Design

The original design for Kerameikos archaeological site can be seen below:

Figure 14- Kerameikos current logo, displayed by the ticket office

Source: Elizabeth Kearsey

In order to create a logo that connects the identity of our branding campaign to Kerameikos archaeological site and museum, the original logo of the horse was retained, but instead was used to create the letter ‘K’ of Kerameikos. The logo and writing are then underlined by a rickety line, representing the river Eridanos that once flowed through Kerameikos. This is then connected to the ‘O’ of Kerameikos. As Kerameikos is branded as the circle of life, the ‘O’ is a representation of this circle. In addition to this, the logo is encompassed with this circle of life. The circle that surrounds the word Kerameikos is a mix of words, both English and Greek, which represent things ancient and modern connected with Kerameikos and the surrounding areas. This is done to represent that everything throughout the ages to do with life surround Kerameikos.

160

Figure 15- Kerameikos Heritage shop potential logo

Source: Elizabeth Kearsey

However, this logo is rather busy and there needed to be a more simplistic element to it. Therefore several ideas, using the circle concept were sketched out. These can be seen below.

Figure 16- Kerameikos logo design Figure 17- Simple Kerameikos logo design

The above figures truly represent the circle of life within Kerameikos, but do not convey the message of the heritage shop of Kerameikos, that being a commercial part of the heritage sector.

161

Figure 18 below represents the circle of life, discussed above, within the commercial zone, as the logo is surrounded by an electronic scanning barcode. This is the preferred logo.

Figure 18- using the more simplistic logo, surrounded by an electronic scanning barcode

162

Appendix 13- A product prototype

The product below (fig.19) is a modern mug that takes the inscription from the attic Oinochoe vase, printed on the mug and translated into English and Greek. As this is a prototype, the mug can be more related to the site, such as in the style of a cup seen in the museum of Kerameikos (fig.20). The choice of that particular phrase was made because this was the first written phrase that was found on a vase in the ancient Greek language.

Figure 19 -Prototype product for heritage shop

Source: Elizabeth Kearsey

Figure 20- Drinking vessels found in Kerameikos Archaeological site museum

Source: Anastasia Pouliou

163

164