The Experience Economy in Museums

The experience economy in museums

MSc Business Administration – Track EMCI

Supervisor: Matthijs Leendertse

Isabella van Marle 10024832

Date 24-6-2016

Statement of originality

This document is written by Isabella van Marle who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document. I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it. The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.

Table of content

1. Introduction 5

2. Theoretical Framework 7

2.1. The Experience economy 7

2.2. Generation Y 9

2.3.1. Museum objectives 11

2.3.2. Museum challenges 12

2.4. Business model innovation 16

2.4.1. Value proposition 18

2.4.2. Customer relationship 24

2.4.3. Channel 39

3. Research methodology 33

3.1. Research design and strategy 33

3.2. Sample 34

3.3. Data collection 36

3.4. Validity and reliability 38

3.5. Data analysis 39

4. Results 40

4.1. Challenges 41

4.2. Generation Y 41

4.3. Value proposition 42

4.3.1. Participation and interactivity 42

4.3.2. Education vs. Entertainment 46

4.3.3. Personalization 48

4.3.4. Design 50

4.4. Customer relationship 54

4.4.1. Co-creation 57

4.4.2. Networks 58

4.5. Channel 60

4.5.1. Communication channel 60

4.5.2. Distribution channel 61

4.5.3. Sales channel 64

5. Conclusion & discussion 67

5.1. Summary of empirical findings 69

5.2. Discussion of findings 72

5.3. Implications for practice 72

5.4. Limitations and recommendations for future research 74

6. References 76

7. Appendix 83

Abstract

The oversupply of leisure activities makes it challenging for museums to attract audiences.

This thesis explores how experience economy principles can strategically help museums to attract and retain Generation Y consumers. New business models are combined with the experience economy. Empirical data is obtained through interviews with fifteen experts, working in the Dutch museum sector. Interview transcripts have been compared and results show experience economy principles function as strategic tools to attract and retain

Generation Y. Museum experiences are enhanced through the emerging trends of digital storytelling and visual culture. Experience economy principles help museums create public value in new ways, by offering innovative offerings and increasing participation and connection with Generation Y.

1. Introduction

In the 70’s of the last century museums emerged on a large scale. The Western industrialized world was overwhelmed by a museum “boom” (Burton & Scott, 2003). Contemporary museums became cultural icons with symbolic value, part of urban landscapes and started to boost the local economy (Burton and Scott,2003). Since the “boom” on museums have competed with each other for visitors, as well as with other creative industries that provide leisure activities (McCarthy and Jinnett, 2001; Burton and Scott,2003).

In 2011 the Dutch government decided to significantly cut funding to the cultural sector. More recently in 2015, has been announced local governments must cut their culture budget by a further 40% (Zwetsloot, 2015). The growing supply of leisure activities along with the governmental subsidy cuts have both made it increasingly challenging for museums in the Netherlands to attract audiences. Young people and audiences with minority race and poor educational backgrounds are especially difficult for museums to attract. Mannheim’s theory of generations (Kecskemeti, 1970) implies that generations vary according to historical social processes, which should be taken into account when regarding museums customer segmentation. Generation Y (18-30 years old) is not a priority target audience for many museums. However, this generation is by far largest part of population and is responsible for the transmission of cultural heritage to future generations (Djamasbi, Siegel, & Tullis, 2010;

Leask, Fyall & Barron, 2011). Therefore, it is worth understanding and responding to their behaviour and preferences.

Many museums have plenty of unused resources (O’Hare, 2008). Just consider the enormous collections that many museums possess, and then the tip of the iceberg that is exhibited to the public. It is therefore essential to explore how museums might be able to make better use of these resources. To keep up with the dynamic economy, museums need to 5

think strategically of new ways to optimize and fulfil responsibilities of public value creation.

Many business models, including those found in museums are outdated (Chesbrough, 2009;

Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). Dutch museums struggle to cope with digitization, as it asks

for time and financial resources (De Erfgoedmonitor, 2015). New technologies, shifts in

economy and pressures in environment ask for new business models (Louviere and Young,

2009; Bakhshi and Throsby, 2010). From a social entrepreneurial perspective museums must

innovate if they wish to optimize their value to the public. The experience economy implies

organizations have to understand and improve the customer journey. Blending experience

economy principles with new business models could function as strategic tools to enhance

value for this younger audience. Experience economy lives up with characteristics of tech

savvy Generation Y consumers, who grew up as digital natives and are spoiled with endless

options in a broad range of leisure activity opportunities. The experience economy

emphasizes that companies/institutions connect and co-create with their consumers and ask

for their participation (Pine II and Gilmore, 1998). The experience economy has already

proven its relevance and efficacy in many industries and could also function as guiding

strategic tool for museums when considering new business models to increase value for

Generation Y.

Research regarding the experience economy generally focuses on commercial companies and industries for which profit is the end-goal. This thesis will approach the experience economy from a different angle. Little is currently known about the value that the experience economy could have for nonprofit organizations and public institutions. Therefore, this thesis will explore how the experience economy might be integrated into a public institution, as well as how “experience” can be strategically deployed to create public value for Generation

In order to explore the components of the experience economy most fully I outline the

following research question and sub-questions:

RQ: How can museums strategically use experience economy principles to attract and retain

generation Y?

SQ1: How can experience economy principles improve value propositions of museums for

generation Y?

SQ2: How can experience economy principles enhance customer relationships with

Generation Y?

SQ3: How can museums deploy new channels that will reach Generation Y?

2. Theoretical Framework

In this chapter, a description of the existing literature in the relevant field will be given. First,

the meaning of the experience economy and its components are described. Then “Generation

Y”, the focus customer segment in this study, and its characteristics are defined. Also,

common museum objectives and challenges will be explained. Then an explanation of the

business model and its relevance is given in chapter 3. Experience economy principles are

interconnected with new business models. All constructs of business model innovation ; value

propositions, customer relationships and channels, are related to the customer segment

Generation Y.

2.1. The experience economy

In past decades an evolution has taken place in the economy. Where firms once competed to

provide the best products and services, now they prioritize experience in enhancing their

economic value (Pine II and Gilmore, 1998; Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2003; Edvarsson,

Enquist and Johnson, 2005; Pine II and Gilmore, 2014). For many industries, customer experience management has long been an important strategic focal point. Customer experience-oriented organizations analyse experience-based businesses can generate growth

(Verhoef et al., 2009).

The concept of customer experience has started to infiltrate organizations an increasing number of sectors. In an experience economy, understanding the customer journey is crucial. Organizations need to focus on all the phases of a consumer’s experience, which includes that customer’s expectations prior to, during, and after the interaction with the organization and may include multiple communication, distribution, and sales channels (Berry et al., 2002; Verhoef et al., 2009). Industries and technologies have become more interconnected since the fast growth of a digitized world. Today’s consumers, specifically

Generation Y, are much more active and are always connected online (Bolton et al.,2013;

Leask et al., 2013). These shifts towards customers being constantly “switched on” make product– and company- centric views rather out-dated. A more customer oriented view in which consumers actively participate better suits the experience economy (Prahalad &

Ramaswamy, 2003; Chuah et al., 2014; Pine II and Gilmore, 2014). Connecting with consumers and encouraging participation with an organization is an ideal customer-company relationship in the experience economy ( Pine II and Gilmore, 1998; de Swaan Arons et al.,

2014; Pine II and Gilmore, 2014). Connecting implies the way in which companies create environmental relationships for their consumers. Compelling experiences include themes, story lines and enhancement of senses such as; sounds, smell and vision (Pine II and Gilmore,

1998). Furthermore, Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2003) explain experience environments that consumers are actively involved in the form of groups or individuals, and interactions with the consumer through touchpoints and co-created experiences are accommodated. 8

New technologies offer opportunities to take an experience to a higher level of interactivity. For instance, through interactive games (Pine II and Gilmore, 1998; Bakhshi and

Throsby, 2010). In this new world where experiences are often evaluated as more valuable than the products and services themselves, it is advised that organization allow customers to co-create their own experiences with a brand (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2003; Edvarsson,

Enquist & Johnson, 2005; Rowley et al., 2007). This co-creation of experiences is valuable as it stimulates a sense of community (Rowley et al., 2007).

Experiences are intrinsically personal and unique, resulting in memories in individual’s minds. Experiences ask for customer’s involvement in multiple ways: on an emotional, rational, spiritual, physical and sensorial level (Pine II and Gilmore, 1998; Verhoef et al., 2009). Companies can thus enhance relationships by offering personalized experiences

(de Swaan Arons et al., 2014). In addition, multiple senses should be stimulated both through physical and digital touch-points (de Swaan Arons et al., 2014). From a social entrepreneurial perspective, an experience that has been well implemented could serve as a tool for create public value.

2.2. Generation Y

The definition of Generation Y (Gen Y) is unclear. In general, researchers agree that people belonging to Gen Y are born after 1980, but there is no clear consensus on the date of when this generation ends (Eisner, 2005; Noble et al., 2009; Leask et al., 2013). Other names for

Gen Y are Echo boomers, Millennials, the Internet generation and Nexters (Eisner, 2005;

Bolton et al., 2013; Chuah et al., 2014 Leask et al., 2013). In this thesis, this particular generation is referred to as Gen Y and defined as population born between 1980 and 1998.

Gen Y is a very important and powerful generation and a unique target for companies, as they are the first generation growing up as digital natives (Djamasbi et al., 2010). Gen Y is the 9

successive generation of Generation X and the predecessor of Generation Z and is by far the largest of today’s global population (82 million) (Djamasbi et al., 2010). Mannheim’s theory of generations (Kecskemeti, 1970) explains how the social phenomenon of “generation” represents a specific “age group” that is parallel to a historical-social process. Certain patterns of experience and thoughts differ per generation. Generations are very heterogeneous, based on factors including residence, gender, social class, personality and culture (Bolton et al.,2013; Leask et al., 2013). In order to reach out to Gen Y it is important for organizations to understand their values, needs and expectations.

Gen Y is characterized as a tech-savvy generation that has grown up in an information-based culture and economy. They are used to multimedia and constantly connected (Leask et al.,2013; Bolton et al., 2013). Moreover, Gen Y is the first generation to have lived in a digital environment from the day they were born. Growing up surrounded by information technology influences how this generation live their lives (Bolton et al.,2013).

Gen Y experienced the arrival of instant communication technologies and social networking sites, which has also made them active social media users (Bolton et al., 2013). Their early and frequent exposure to technology has made them a very interactive generation, leading to advantages but also makes it challenging for organizations to keep up with their expectations

(Bolton et al.,2013; Leask et al., 2013). Yet, seeking engagement with these digital natives can be considered an opportunity too when companies know how to create value in innovative ways (Leask et al., 2013). When Gen Y seeks for entertainment, it relies heavily on technology. Thus, it is important to react to Gen Y’s interactivity. Second, Gen Y consumers are used to customized and personalized offerings from organizations (Bolton et al., 2013).

Gen Y is a global generation that enjoys a higher level of education than its predecessors, is open-minded and is socially conscious (Eisner, 2005; Leask et al., 2013). At the same time,

this generation is considered the most demanding (Eisner, 2005), which makes it challenging for companies to reach Gen Y (Leask et al., 2013).

2.3.1. Museum objectives

Museums are unique institutions with many different goals (Burton & Scott, 2003; Burton,

Louviere, & Young, 2009; Frey & Steiner, 2012). Noble’s five-part analysis, (1970) is still a useful tool for measuring a museum’s performance (Frey & Steiner, 2012). As Noble states collection, conservation and study are a museum’s key responsibilities that affect performance and prestige. The manner in which museums respect the objectives of exhibition and communication are also highly important in creating public value. In addition to these five responsibilities museums have financial and social goals such as education, and politics.

Porter (2006) adds visitation and the visitor experience to Noble’s goals (1970).

Museums are not like organizations that have profit as their prior goal, yet financial factors are nevertheless relevant to their business models, making them still different from other non-profit organizations. Museums are seen as somewhere in the middle – as hybrids

(Schuster, 2009). Frey (1998) describes how so-called “superstar museums” are forced to offer “total experience” to visitors and have to provide for education, entertainment but also food and merchandise products. These “superstar museums” have (1) great prominence among population, on a national and international level; (2) a large number of visitors; (3) a generally known collection; (4) an exceptional architecture; and (5) a large role of commercialization. Museums can raise financial revenue through ticket sales, shops and restaurants, but they are also highly dependent on corporate sponsors, private donors and governmental funding (Frey & Steiner, 2010). Most museums are public property, and so maintaining its public value is one of a museum’s main objectives. Furthermore, museums need to evince their governing body that they take their public mission seriously and continue

to generate public value (Burton & Scott, 2003; Frey & Steiner, 2010).

2.3.2 Museum challenges

Museums face several challenges. Due to governmental subsidy cuts, shifts in economy and leisure patterns, and digitization museums are under constant pressure (Burton & Scott, 2003;

Burton, Louviere & Young, 2009; Frey & Steiner, 2012). Especially recent issues for museums, but also problems museums have faced for a long time will be discussed below.

Tension art and commerce

The museum’s hybrid character leads to tension between artistic and financial values, and this tension is present across museum’s as well as within their organizational structure (Eikhof &

Haunschild, 2007; Peltoniemi, 2015). The conflict between artistically-focused and financially-focused managers is a commonly studied topic in the literature on cultural industries (Hirsch, 1972; Eikhof & Haunschild, 2007; Peltoniemi, 2015). Artistic and financial managers have conflicting goals, which can often lead to a clash within the organization (Peltoniemi, 2015). Integration and negotiation between the groups within a museum are essential for both financial and creative success (Mora, 2006; Peltoniemi, 2015).

Museums are primarily engaged in cultural production; therefore, collaboration between artistic and financial managers is necessary. However, this does not eliminate the challenge to reconcile artistic and profit-driven goals in the creation and execution of a museum’s strategy

(Peltoniemi, 2015).

Space issues

Another common problem for museums is lack of physical space. Although most museums are public property, in many cases only small areas of the building are accessible to visitors.

This is due to space issues, so reducing public value. O’Hare (2008) describes the phenomenon as a waste of resources. Highbrow art museums, for example, have large collections. Bakhshi and Throsby (2010) state digital developments offer solutions to this common problem. In 2014 almost 3 million objects of Dutch museum collections were made accessible for the public online. This seems a great deal, but was still only 5% of Dutch museums’ total collection (65 million). Making objects available online is still moving slowly, and this is due to a variety of factors (De Erfgoedmonitor, 2015). First, digitization is expensive and time consuming, and once objects are digitized this does not mean the objects will be made immediately accessible online; that is the next step. Second, many museums’ object registrations are not up to date which makes the process even more time consuming.

Third, many museum staff members lack knowledge of how to use electronic systems. Fourth, museums simply have other priorities (De Erfgoedmonitor, 2015). Thus, making collections accessible online requires a great deal of time, knowledge and financial resources.

Audience diversity

Only a small number of the population is interested in visiting museums ( Burton & Scott,

2003). Prentice et al. (1997) conducted a research in Edinburgh which did not only analysed museum visitors but also tried to find reasons for non-visitors; the results showed a conflict in attitudes, interests and issues with time constraints. The most prominent reasons for museum non-visitors appeared to be lack of time, interest and generally preferring to spend time on other leisure activities (Prentice et al., 1997; Burton & Scott, 2003; Burton et al., 2009). The struggle to attract audiences and the growing competitive leisure activity environment remains an issue for museums (Burton & Scott, 2003; Leask et al., 2013).

Attracting different social groups naturally requires different strategies. It should be a museum’s mission to include less educated and lower income groups in their outreach 13

programmes (Louviere & Young, 2009; Bakhshi & Throsby, 2010). Younger people seem to be a particularly difficult customer segment for museums to attract and retain yet they are the future and are required to pass on the baton of cultural heritage to the next generation. When younger people think about what to do in their free time, they often do not feel the urge to visit a museum, and many simply lack interest in visiting museums (Prentice et al., 1997;

Burton & Scott, 2003).

Oversupply

The so-called museum “boom” created a buzz and increased museum visits. However, the museum sector also landed itself in a never-ending battle for attracting and maintaining audiences (Burton & Scott, 2003; Louviere & Young, 2009). When supply exceeds demand, there is an oversupply, which is; a common phenomenon in the creative industries

(Peltoniemi, 2015). In addition to an oversupply of museums, the supply of leisure activities is also increasing.

Shifts in consumer behaviour

There have also been fundamental changes to leisure values and consumer patterns. In a dynamic world, people are seeking leisure activities that enable them to undertake several activities within a short space of time. Thus, consumers today have more to do in less time

(Burton & Scott; 2003). These changes in consumer – and leisure – patterns forces 21st- century museums to think of new ways to cope with the modern visitor’s expectations (Burton

& Scott, 2003; Leask et al., 2013).

Overcomeqchallenges

Museums’ struggles to achieve their goals on both commercial and public levels remains a

challenge. The design and execution of strategies could help overcome the bumps in the road to success. How should museums position themselves in this competitive environment, which varies from serious to casual leisure activities? The literature on strategy emphasizes that a customer oriented view is crucial (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2003; Chuah et al., 2014; Pine II

& Gilmore, 2014). Frey (1998) explains; “superstar museums are in competition with other superstar museums as well as with other suppliers of the ‘total experience’.” Museums must use their historically acquired core competence and consider what their uniquely qualified position is (Frey, 1998). According to the positioning school (Porter,1979) competitive strategy depends upon the industry in which an organization sits. Porter (2006) studied the strategy foundations of museums that lead to social benefits for the public, which includes educational programs, exhibition, marketing and sales, and visitor services. Porter (2006) states museums should create a unique and sustainable competitive position, by differentiation. Thus, from a strategic point of view, museums should ask themselves how to create a unique value proposition and explore which resources are required. Museums must identify and create sustainable competitive advantage within an oversupply of leisure activities (Frey, 1998). A visitor orientation should function as the basis of a museums strategic orientation. Frey (1998) explains how traditional objectives; pure preservation, conservation and research become less central, but stay important. He explains how museums should deliver services for the visitor first, eventually making more resources available that can be used for traditional objectives. Offering the “total experience” for visitors requires major attention to expectations and demands of the public (Frey, 1998).

Burton and Scott (2003) state that museums should position themselves as institutions featuring “ideal” leisure activity attributes and, at the same time, emphasize the attributes that are unique to museum visits.

It is crucial for museums to rethink their business strategies. Rethinking business 15

models can help museums to translate their goals into an unique value proposition and find ways to shape an outstanding museum experience for Gen Y. Business models can help museums to strategize and offer insight into the resources that are essential for implementing experience economy principles (Prentice et al., 1997; Porter, 2006; Louviere & Young, 2009).

2.4. Business model innovation

Business models are necessary for an organization’s success, irrespective if it is a new or an already established organization (Margretta, 2003; Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010;

Chesbrough, 2010; Swaan Arons & van den Driest, 2014). Teece (2010) defines business models as “the organizational and financial architecture of a business” (p.191) and refers to the way it operates as well as how value is created with stakeholders. A new business model may either be developed to launch a new product or service to fulfil customers’ unmet needs, or –, and this is particularly interesting for this research; to improve a process innovation of an existing product or service (Margretta, 2003; Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). Margretta

(2003) explains why business models matter: first of all, business models illustrate clarity

(Margretta, 2003; Chesbrough, 2010). A good business model tells the story of a business

(Margretta, 2003; Casadesus-Masanell & Ricart, 2010). Business models help employees to view their own job within the larger context of the company, contributing to improving of their own work methods. Business models answer important questions, such as: who is the customer? And: what does the customer value? (Margretta, 2003; Casadesus-Masanell &

Ricart, 2010; Teece, 2010).

Business models also help organizations to carry out and offer valuable feedback when managers comply with business models during all kinds of operations (Margretta,

2003). For museums, the benefit of business models can be useful for analysing the tension between artistic and financial goals, and may help to devise solutions to struggles and

challenges. When business models are followed, any issues can be quickly identified, and may suggest the business models needs to be re-examined or highlight the key elements that need adjustment (Margretta, 2003).

Furthermore, business models can either directly or indirectly create competitive advantage. The terms “business model” and “strategy” are often confused, but they are not the same (Margretta, 2003; Casadesus-Masanell & Ricart, 2010). However, they do strongly correlate: business models define how all parts of a business fit together (Margretta, 2003;

Chesbrough, 2010;, Teece, 2010). Although it is a crucial factor to take into account in order to deliver good performance, competition is not included in business models. That is where strategy addressed (Margretta, 2003). Casadesus-Masanell and Ricart (2010) state that, “a business model is a reflection of the firm’s realized strategy” (p.203). Strategic decisions are made regarding where to apply the business model. A competitive strategy explains how be different. New business models that include offerings that are difficult to replicate may result in strong competitive advantage (Barney, 1991; Margretta, 2003). The business model also helps explain which resources create competitive advantage (Barney, 1991; Osterwalder &

Pigneur, 2010).

Current museum business models are in need of innovation (Bakhshi and Throsby,

2010; Camarero & Garrido, 2012). Innovation in the public sector is crucial in order to improve economic performance, social welfare and environmental sustainability (Alves,

2012). It is therefore challenging, though necessary, for museum managers to design new business models (Chesbrough, 2010; Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010; Teece, 2010).

Experience economy principles can function as useful tools for enhancing innovative business models. In this thesis, channels, value propositions and customer relationships form the basis for revised business models. The great strength of the business model as a planning tool is that all key elements must relate to each other in order for a business to function 17

(Margretta, 2003). Thus, customer relationships, value propositions and channels are all interconnected. Customer segmentation is another crucial factor for museums to take into account during their business model creation, and it is associated to all other key elements

(Chesbrough, 2010; Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). This research focuses on one particular customer segment; Gen Y.

2.4.1 Value propositions

Customer value has become a major focus in strategy literature and among firm executives

(Desarbo, Jedidi & Sinha, 2001; Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). In order to be successful, organizations need to understand who their target audience is, what their consumers value, how they can create value and manage it over time (Desarbo et al., 2001; Teece, 2010; Porter and Kramer, 2011).

A value proposition creates value for customers through a combination of elements that fulfil customers needs (Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010; Teece, 2010). Value can be created at any of the three stages of the customer journey: the pre-visit, the museum visit and the after-visit, and these should all be taken into account (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). The customer value-based theory, introduced by Alderson (1957) and Drucker (1973) highlighted the importance of the perceived value of a firm’s customer. Innovative value propositions create the environment of a customer’s value focus (Slater, 1997). Museums create value in many ways, on cultural, economic and public levels (Bakhshi & Throsby, 2010; Frey and

Steiner, 2010). This thesis will largely focus on public value, and focus on how museums strategically can increase value for Gen Y. Value propositions are interconnected with the other factors of business model innovation; customer relationships, customer segmentations and channels (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). The value-creating elements that museums can deploy are discussed below:

Participation & interactivity

Gen Y consumers are characterized by actively searching for, sharing and consuming content

(Bolton et al., 2013). Falk and Dierking (2012) emphasize the existing and growing importance of the media as an influential component of interactivity, especially for Gen Y.

Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2003) state that co-created experiences are the basis for value, meaning interactive opportunities should be offered in order for consumers to create value.

Co-participation and collaboration with museum visitors are important elements to optimize museum experience for this generation (Bolton et al., 2013; Leask et al., 2013; Pine II and

Gilmore, 2014).

Today, the ways that museum visitors discover exhibits and learn during their visit are commonly driven by social interaction (Bannon et al., 2005). Social interaction can, for instance, be stimulated through the use of theatre and performance (Falk & Dierking, 2012).

Every museum has a communal or social makeup. People are always discreetly aware of the presence of other visitors, and these other visitors indirectly contribute to shaping the exhibition’s space and experience (Wineman & Peponis, 2010).

Technology offers many opportunities for museums to interact with their consumers

(Bakhshi and Throsby, 2010). When museums want to innovate in the experience economy, it is important to fuse digital technology with reality (Pine II & Gilmore, 2014). Gen Y is hardly inseparable from mobile devices. Millennials take their technological devices everywhere they go, as well as in museums. Integrating digital technology into the physical environment is a way to appeal to the interactive nature of Gen Y (Pine II & Gilmore, 2014). New technologies can enhance the interactive nature of Gen Y both online, on the web (e.g. interactive gallery maps, online access to collections), and offline, for instance through interactive multimedia tours in the museum (Bakshi and Throsby, 2010).

Innovation

New products, services and experiences can fulfil customer needs when new value is perceived (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010; Teece, 2010). Thus, certain innovations can lead to greater customer convenience (Lindic & da Silva, 2011). The increased value through novelty is often related to technology (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). New digital technologies, including mobile apps, can contribute to cultural and economic value in museums (Bakhshi &

Throsby, 2010; Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). New digital technologies can help museums to therefore extend their offer to their audience on a socio-economic level as well as coping with space limits. On a museum’s website, new technologies can offer many opportunities, from online access to collections, through online databases to virtual 360-degree exhibitions,

(Bakshi & Throsby, 2010). New technologies can evolve the art form itself, leading to new sorts of exhibitions. Owing to new technologies, new terms such as ‘virtual museum’ and

‘museum without walls’ have arisen (Bakshi & Throsby, 2010). Indeed, technology can provide both novel online and offline experiences (Pine II & Gilmore, 1998; Prahalad &

Ramaswamy, 2003; Pine II and Gilmore, 2014; de Swaan Arons et al., 2014).

Informal learning: education & entertainment

Powel and DiMaggio (2012) explain how a museum’s organizational strategy, mission and character influences education. A museum can either be elitist or have a more public-friendly character. Patrons, trustees and donors are largely responsible for governing conventional museums influencing education programmes and often resulting in programmes meeting the needs and interest of local elites and middle class. Museums inspired by the reform model and try to avoid this type of exclusion, which results in education programmes that are more appealing to a broader general public.

Falk et al. (1998) divide visitors’ motivations for museum visits into six categories, two of which include education and entertainment. Education relates to the “aesthetic significance, informational or cultural content” in a museum (p.190). Occasionally learning something specific, but more often learning in general, is a common reason for museum visits. Entertainment represents more leisure-related reasons for museum visits. A visitor’s pre-visit agenda has a direct influence on his/her behaviour and learning in the museum space.

Individuals with a strong educational motivation are more focused on the information about objects available in an exhibition, while visitors with a strong motivation to visit a museum for entertainment purposes are more focused on the objects. However, the terms “education” and “entertainment” can also go in hand in hand during museum experiences (Falk et al.,

1998).

Furthermore, museum visitors are in search for social and/or recreational experiences during their museum visit, more precisely, people feed their general interest and curiosity through informal learning (Prentice et al., 1997). According to Prentice et al. (1997), museum managers should not put too much emphasis on intellectual motivation as the reason for museum visits. Instead, Prentice et al. (1997) conclude that broadening general knowledge, satisfying curiosity, having a day out and escaping the day-to-day routine are more prevalent reasons for museum visits. Informal learning is to some extent constructed through the way in which visitors are expected to move through a museum’s space. More specifically, the opportunity to notice patterns, connections, and divisions in the space of the exhibition creates people’s perception and understanding of museum content (Wineman & Peponis, 2010).

Entertainment can be a strong tool for attracting not only highly educated youngsters, but also people from diverse educational backgrounds. Pine II and Gilmore (1998) explain how education combined with entertainment requiring passive participation, such as attending a concert or visiting a museum, lead to an absorbed experience. Yet, education can also 21

require more active participation and immersion of museum visitors, which results in an escapist experience. Escapist experiences can still be educative and entertaining.

Innovations and technologies change environments, including learning environments

(Straub, 2009). Mixed media do not only make museums more accessible in general, they also interpret and make content more accessible (Falk & Dierking, 2012). Interactive games and virtual reality offer completely new forms of entertainment and education for museum audiences (Bakshi & Throsby, 2010; Pine II and Gilmore, 1998).

Storytelling

Storytelling is an increasingly popular tool that can connect the educational with the entertainment aspects of a museum experience (Tsou, Wang & Zeng, 2006). Storytelling can help make information understandable on a more personal level and provokes consumers’ imagination and feelings (Adamson et al., 2006). Storytelling can greatly enhance education, and often asks for active participation. Furthermore, technological developments can also enhance storytelling (Bakshi & Throsby, 2010).

Personalization

Innovation in the public sector requires the involvement of consumers and personalized products and services (Alves, 2012). Personalized offerings increase consumer’s’ perceived value of a brand or firm, and eventually deepens the customer relationship (Pine II and

Gilmore, 1998; Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2003; Pine II & Gilmore, 2014; de Swaan Arons et al., 2014). Customization needs innovative methods to fulfil the individual needs of customers

(Pine II & Gilmore, 2014). Mass customization implies that “customer sacrifice” should be minimized, meaning the gap between what individual customers settle for in buying mass- produced products and services and what they exactly want is reduced (Pine II & Gilmore,

2014). Physical and digital touch- points enhance the personalization experience for

consumers, which eventually enhance the customer relationship. Gen Y is characterized as a critical consumer with distinct preferences and little time. Multiple studies suggest that, in order to attract Gen Y, events and activities should be targeted specifically at them, as Gen Y is a distinct audience group, and is used to receiving personalized and customized offers

(Leask et al., 2011; Bolton et al., 2013). A greater amount of information is replaced with,- or at least extended by, individually tailored experiences. Innovative museums understand that standardized materials such as wall texts, for example, should be supplemented with personalized presentations on mobile devices (Bakshi & Throsby, 2010).

Design

Design is a broad concept and involves a great deal of aspects. Design is an essential value proposition for museums that determines to what extent audience is reached (MacDonald,

2007). Design exists on a broader level in which experiences, as well as products, exhibitions and media, are designed. The design of experiences is just as important as it is for goods and services (Pine II & Gilmore, 1998). Frey (1998) emphasizes “superstar museums” have great architecture, which is also connected to design. Museum curators need to take the wishes of diverse customer segments into account when they come to design exhibitions (Prentice et al.,

2007). From an interpretative perspective, design is not only considered a tool for presenting content; it is an integral part of visitor experience, with extensive implications for determining the nature of museum experience (MacDonald, 2007). Pine II and Gilmore (1998) imply that a consolidated story line is built from design elements and staged events of experience, enhancing value, and garnering memorable experiences for the consumer. Storytelling can be designed by combining symbols, characters, drama, conflict, plot twists, humour and suspense (Adamson et al., 2006). There are some common, traditional features taken into account by museum curators and designers when they design of museum exhibitions, such as

spatial lay out, colour, and the way information is shared with the public (MacDonald, 2007).

The way in which museum visitors are led through a museum, either clearly defined or self- conducted, will shape a visitor’s impression (Wineman & Peponis, 2010). Museum curators are also tasked to think of innovative ways to design exhibitions. Mixed media artefacts and technological tools, for instance, can help to determine the nature of the museum experience

(Bannon, 2005). Digitalization and technology offer many opportunities for museums to design new sorts of museum experiences (Bakhshi & Throsby, 2010; Osterwalder & Pigneur,

2010). Augmented reality, virtual reality, and co-creation are examples of innovative ways to take the design of museum exhibitions to a higher level of experience (Bannon et al., 2005).

Furthermore, design is strongly related with other aspects of the business model, especially participation, education and communication. A museum exhibition can be designed in such way that it asks for greater or less interactivity and social interaction, so shaping museum experience (Bannon et al, 2005). The design of exhibitions can touch people on both emotional and educational levels; the ultimate experience may stand out because of its superior design, therefore an important aspect for staging experiences in museums

(Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010).

2.4.2. Customer relationships

The second construct of the new business model to which museums should adhere is customer relationship (Chesbrough, 2010; Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010; de Swaan Arons et al.,

2014). This element is highly important in shaping a consumer’s total experience (Bakhshi and Throsby, 2010; Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010; de Swaan Arons et al., 2014). Customer relationships help museums to achieve customer retention (Verhoef, 2003). Enhancing customer relationships implies museums have to create experiences and respond to the wishes and demands of different customer segments (Bakhshi and Throsby, 2010; Osterwalder and

Pigneur, 2010; de Swaan Arons et al., 2014). In the last decade, Western arts organizations have given more attention to audience- based strategies. Some museums are more advanced than others in enhancing their digitization strategy and investing experiences in museum visits. The British Tate is one of the precursors of innovating museums, with regard to museum visitors and implementation of digital innovations. Due to the implementation of new digital technologies, a broader audience is reached and stronger relationships with the public can be sustained (Bakhshi and Throsby, 2010). Audience- based strategies consist of two forms of customer relationships: transaction marketing, which focuses on building new audiences, and relationship marketing, which concentrates on intensifying the relationship with existing audiences (Bakhshi and Throsby, 2010).

McCarthy and Jinnett (2001) clarify three ways for cultural institutions to extend their audience reach. Audience broadening means that museums try to re-attract a significant portion of traditional museum visitors, who currently do not visit that particular museum.

Audience deepening implies that museums intensify the visitor’s level of involvement, for instance, by actively encouraging visitors to engage with objects. The last way to extend museum’s audience reach can be improved through audience diversifying, focuses on attracting new groups of consumers (Bakhshi & Throsby, 2010).

Customer relationship management (CRM) has been extensively studied in the literature (Verhoef, 2003; Reinartz et al., 2004; Payne & Frow, 2007). However, there is no clear consensus on what CRM exactly is (Verhoef, 2003; Reinartz et al, 2004; Payne & Frow,

2005). The definitions and descriptions vary from narrow and tactical to broad and strategic.

CRM is only effective when companies understand its meaning and when employees are committed to CRM activities (Payne and Frow, 2005). Furthermore, it is crucial that museums understand how to implement CRM. Many organizations appear to struggle with the implementation of CRM, and did not lead to improvement but rather resulted in losses. The 25

CRM process has functional, customer- facing and company- wide levels (Reinartz et al.,

2004). This thesis will focus on the customer-facing level, in which individual distribution, channels and functions are distinguished for each consumer. Osterwalder & Pigneur (2010) explain that customer acquisition, customer retention and the boosting of sales, are all motivations for organizations to enhance customer relationships. The first two motivations are in line with the research motives of this thesis.

Successful organizations realize that product- and brand-centric marketing must be replaced by a customer-centric approach, as customer relationships increase customer value and result in better performance and profitability (Reinartz et al., 2004; Payne & Frow, 2005).

When museums innovate their business models, visitor orientation is one of the key dimensions to market orientation. Collaboration with competitors does not have a direct effect on customer relationships but does indirectly boost the effect of visitor orientation (Camarero

& Garrido, 2012). However, Bakhshi and Throsby (2010) assert that too strong an emphasis on customer orientation can make museums forget the importance of other crucial market orientations, such as competition and product improvements.

In this research, understanding how customer relationships with Gen Y can be deepened and diversified will be explored. Museums need to improve the quality of the visitor experience for younger audiences and also realize that Gen Y is used to interaction and technology, which eventually leads to customer relationships (Bakhshi & Throsby, 2010).

Co-creation

The conventional relationship, in which companies actively deliver and consumers passively receive, is out-dated. The company-centric and product-and-service centric spectrum have been replaced by a customer- centric perspective, where value is created not only for consumers but together with consumers (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2003; Osterwalder &

Pigneur, 2010). Moreover, consumers have proven to be excellent and inspiring sources of innovation for organizations, as they are the users of products and services (Alves, 2012).

When consumers get the chance to act as co-creator’s, customer relationships are enhanced.

Actively co-creating experiences with customers stimulate a sense of community (Rowley et al., 2007). This sense of community has proven to be important for Gen Y (Bolton et al.,

2013).

Innovative business models include co-created experiences with customers. Often with aid of technological innovations (Desarbo et al., 2001). Davies (2009) explains that co- production in temporary museum exhibitions can take place through visitors’ involvement external to the museum (Davies, 2009). External parties can be anyone who is not a part of the museum’s staff: community groups, students, local residents, other groups or individuals

(Davies, 2009). Public participation meets the basic responsibility of museums as public bodies (Frey & Steiner, 2010). Co-produced exhibitions require a degree of networking, negotiation and facilitation skills between museum staff. Furthermore, clear agreements, trust, and commitment between parties can make or break the success of co-production (Davies,

2009).

Networks

Institutional theory explains how organizational behaviour and actions are influenced by social justification. Social justification means that organizations act within social and normative contexts (Dacin et al., 2007). Institutional theory addresses the motivations for organizations to connect beyond the organizational level (Brito, 2001; Dacin et al., 2007).

Successful organizations are not mavericks that act on their own in the given market. Instead, business is driven by interdependent entities that must interact in order to perform and achieve desired goals. Through these interactions, inter-organizational relations are developed, and the

maintenance of these involves time, resources and forecasting commitments (Brito, 2001).

Networking is a broadly studied topic in management journals (Brass et al., 2004;

Pittaway et al., 2004). Networks offer opportunities to individuals and open doors for museums to innovate and attract new audiences. Indirectly, networks can enhance customer relationships, as networks offer access for organizations to receive new information, resources, markets and scope economies (Brass et al., 2004; Grant & Baden-Fuller, 2004).

Networks can be defined as a set of nodes representing an existence or lack of relationships, between nodes. Nodes can be individuals, work units or organizations, and both strong and weak ties establish interrelationships between networks (Brass et al., 2004). Brass et al.

(2004) consider three levels of analysis for networks: 1) the interpersonal level (for individuals), 2) the inter-unit level (for groups), and 3) the inter-organizational level (for organizations). The focus of this thesis will be inter- organizational networks (for museums) and interpersonal networks (for consumers) because these two types of networks can amplify customer relationships.

Galaskiewics (1985) explains the motives behind inter-organizational networks; integrated networks have a positive effect on performance, firm survival and innovation.

When museums are part of the same networks as its customers, unique experience environments can be co-created (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2003). Yet, building an effective network can be complicated, due to competition and information control (Brass et al., 2004).

According to organization theory, inter- organizational networks should contain embedded ties that, closely reflect special relationships (Uzzi, 1997). When museums are part of well- integrated networks, they can acquire new resources, achieve collective goals. Also, networks shape innovation, both in terms of output and input (Brass et al., 2004) and, therefore, networks can embrace the value proposition of innovation (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010).

The two main factors for creating experiences are: connection and participation with the 28

public. Absorption lies at one end of the connection spectrum and immersion on the other.

Participation can either require active or passive contribution of consumers. Combinations of these realms can lead to entertainment, education, esthetic or escapist experiences. Pine II and

Gilmore (1998) explain that they are not mutually exclusive; escapist experiences can teach just as well as educational events can. Networks can lead to new ties and connections, making new types of experiences possible (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2003; Pine II & Gilmore, 2014).

Experience networks occur within experience environments. These networks take the social value of customer relationships to a higher level (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2003).

Partnerships and collaborations of museums with other creative sectors increases value in that it expands the cultural institution’s social network. Gen Y is particularly interested in social networks, making it logical for museums to connect with this particular customer segment through social networks (Bolton et al., 2013). New networks can intensify relationships with established customers, which can then lead to customer relationships with new audiences.

Diversity in network relationships, which can be achieved through crossing industry boundaries, appears to have a positive impact on innovation. Networks with other creative sectors simultaneously increase value on an organizational and on a customer level (Prahalad

& Ramaswamy, 2003; Pittaway et al., 2004).

2.4.3. Channel

Channel is the last aspect of the new business model that museums should pursue, and is strongly interconnected with; customer segmentation, value propositions and customer relationships. Channels are customer touch-points, created for customers, and shaping customer experience (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). Channels explain the way in which organizations communicate with -– and reach out to –individual customer segments

(Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). Customer segments differ, and are thus reached in different

ways. Gen Y is constantly connected, interactive, and lives in a multi-channel environment

(Eisner, 2005; Noble et al., 2009; Bolton et al., 2013). Museums need to think strategically about how to implement or optimize their existing channels to reach Gen Y. Do, for example, current museum channels fulfil this group’s needs, or is there a need for innovation to attract and retain them?

Channels contains three levels:; communication-, distribution- and sales (Osterwalder &

Pigneur, 2010). These three levels vary in three ways: they can be online, offline, or both.

While online channels might mean , social media,; offline channels refer to a museum’s physical communication, distribution and sales outlets, for instance, within the building of the museum. Another distinction, also spread across the three levels, can be made between a museum’s own channels and external channels of which the museum may be a part. Channels create experience environments that are supported by an experience network. These networks do not stay within their own industry; instead, they exist within combined creative industries

(Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2003).

Communication channels

Communication channels explain the way in which museums communicate their content, for example, through video, images or text. The communication process within museums was once between a producer and a passive audience. Nowadays, multiple signs are used to construct meaningful messages for active and diverse audiences (Bakhshi and Throsby, 2010;

Stylianou-Lambert, 2010). Museum communication channels shape their consumers’ experiences of visit, before during and after it has taken place. Communication is one of the traditional goals, introduced by Noble (1970) and has since taken on a new direction due to further innovation in digitized technologies (Frey and Steiner, 2010). There is a shift towards a “multi-directional many-to-many communication” (p.70), in which the traditional

communication style of lecturing is replaced by interactive conversation between museums and the public (Kidd, 2011). Storytelling is one way that a museum can communicate with its consumers, and embraces the experience economy principles.

Adamson et al. (2006) explain how storytelling is meant to capture people's imagination and also induce emotions. Stories create experiences that can be understood on a personal level. Storytelling goes beyond informative communicating; instead, it should inspire consumers, resulting in meaningful and lasting memories. New technologies can enhance storytelling and the museum experience in general, for instance, through multimedia tours

(Tsou, Wang & Zeng, 2006).

Distribution channels

Distribution channels are the channels used to deliver content. It is important to match distribution channels with targeted customer segments, as there are many differences in media usage use between customer segments. Thus, museums must look at their audience groups and how they individually use media. Kidd (2011) describes how an increase of social media use in the museum sector in the UK is challenging for museums to deploy across distribution channels. However, it is important for museums to keep in mind that Gen Y are heavy social media users (Eisner, 2005; Noble et al., 2009; Bolton et al., 2013). Social media takes museum objects to new directions, and; physical boundaries (such as the unavailability of the object in the museum itself) can be overcome through virtual channels. Although new media can have many positive effects, such as enhancing customer relationships and increasing value for Gen Y, museums also need to understand social media. In order to be successful in their social media activity, museums should think strategically about how to deploy social media and how to meet Gen Y’s expectations (Kidd, 2011).

Sales channels

Products, services, channels and industries are all starting to blend with each other (Prahalad

& Ramaswamy, 2003). Frey (1998) describes how so called superstar museums are also commercialized: alternative distribution and sales –channels are considered beyond ticket sales, in order to increase financial revenue. A serious part of a superstar museum’s’ income derives from revenue from gift shops and restaurants (Frey, 1998). Some museums really take commercial activities to the next level in order to increase the sales of products (merchandise) and services (restaurants). Museums deploy alternative sales channels to sell tickets, as well as products and services, both offline and online.

Internal channels vs. external channels

A distinction can be made between the museum’s internal and external channels. In addition to a museum’s own, internal channels, such as CRM system and Facebook fan page, external channels can also be deployed. External channels can enhance value propositions for Gen Y, and help museums to build new audiences (Bakhshi and Throsby, 2010). Industrial networks exist across own industries but also beyond the domestic industry. Also, in the cultural industries, interdependent organizations act as communities themselves (Currid, 2007;

Peltoniemi, 2015). Converging technologies lead to shifting and blurring industry boundaries.

Industries become networked and companies are no longer chained to one industry type

(Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2003). Cross-sector “fertilization” is a common phenomenon in arts and culture environments. Furthermore, cross- sector fertilization increases value through formal and informal events (Currid, 2007). Grant and Baden-Fuller (2004) explain how these strategic alliances of participating in networks can help gather new resources. Strategic alliances and thus external channels can lead to knowledge acquisition and help museums connect with Gen Y audiences.

Conceptual model

VALUE PROPOSITION CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CHANNEL

>Participation >Co-creation >Communication

>Innovation >Networks >Distribution

>Education >Sales

>Entertainment

>Personalization

>Design

3. Research methodology

This section discusses how and why certain data were obtained, and how these data were analysed. First, the developed research design and strategy will be discussed, together with how it matches the research objective. Then, the sample and data collection will be described.

In the fourth part of this section, the validity and reliability of this study will be discussed and the data analysis will be described.

3.1. Research design and strategy

The goal of this research is to discover patterns of museum strategies to attract and retain Gen

Y, and to what extent experience economy principles are taken into account in these 33

strategies. A qualitative research design has been conducted and experts are chosen as appropriate interviewees. Qualitative research mirrors real-life organizational settings and has an inherently humanistic focus, which is in line with the goals of this particular research.

Qualitative research offers socially important and theoretically meaningful contributions to organizational life (Rynes & Gephart, 2004). In- depth interviews provide the chance to understand different difficulties and opportunities a museum faces and emerging patterns

(Ritchie, 2003; Yin, 2009). Experts offer multiple perspectives and opinions about the field of interest and are therefore chosen for this qualitative study. Semi-structured interviews are appropriate for interviewing experts, as these experts will have a strong theoretical understanding of the topic and will be able to talk fluidly about desired future directions for museums. This structure is balanced by an interview guide protocol to increase research reliability (Leech, 2002).

For the purpose of the business model innovation (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010), experts were chosen as appropriate interviewees. These experts are professionals working in the museum branch and, have expertise in this field of interest.

3.2. Sample

In total, fifteen experts have been selected according to established selection criteria. The selected experts have leading positions in the museum sector and had to meet several requirements. These requirements, namely, expertise in; communication, education, and/or exhibitions, as these categories are part of museum’s’ main objectives for creating public value (Frey & Steiner, 2010). Similar functions departments such as marketing/communication and presentation, were also included in the sample. Museum award nominations and wins were used as criteria for selection. Awards for, innovation, design, education and new media imply the museum were the experts works fulfils a certain strategy, 34

resulting in public value. The experts were selected and approached, based on the area of

reputation of the selected museum or randomly, as not all institutions received awards. Most

reputational museums are located in Noord-Holland (122), and Zuid-Holland (104) because of

the concentration of museums in big cities such as Amsterdam, Rotterdam and The Hague

(RCE, 2016). Therefore, most experts from this sample work in museums located in one of

these areas.The final research population consists of 15 museum experts, where two experts

(M2 & M9) work at two organizations. Thus, in total, professional knowledge from 15

experts working in the museum sector is obtained.

Table 1. Museum experts that are part of the empirical study

Museum Museum Function Expert City, Province Expert

M1 FOAM photography Manager, Marketing & Amsterdam museum Communications

M2 Hermitage & de Nieuwe Head Exhibition Amsterdam kerk

M3 Van Gogh Museum Sector Manager, Public Amsterdam Affairs (Marketing, Communications, Publications, Customer Service, Fund raising, De Mesdag Collectie, VGME)

M4 De Pont Head, Education Tilburg

M5 Beeld & Geluid Manager, Creative Hilversum Industries & Media

M6 Maurtishuis Head, Marketing Den Haag

M7 Boijmans van Beuningen Director, Exhibitions Rotterdam

M8 Rijksmuseum Head, Communication & Amsterdam Marketing

M9 N8 & EYE (Exposed) Interim Project Manager, & Amsterdam Employee Education

M10 Amsterdam Museum Employee, Public Affairs Amsterdam & Education

M11 Kröller Müller Museum Coordinator, Education Otterloo

M12 Groninger Museum Head of Communication, Groningen PR & Marketing

M13 Drents Museum Head, Public Affairs Drenthe

M14 Scheepvaart Museum Educator Amsterdam

M15 Stedelijk Museum SenioreMarketer, Amsterdam Marketing& Communication

3.3. Data collection

First, the researcher’s contacts were explored from past internships and friends working

within the museum industry. The remainder of respondents were sent an e-mail including one

of three introductory letters (Appendix 1) relevant to their field of expertise (communication/

education/ exhibition). A description of the research and the value for the expert in

participating was included in this e-mail. Each expert was targeted at one of the departments

of communication, education or exhibition and related departments, leading to a varied

sample of experts. 36

In total eighteen museum experts were contacted, from which sixteen positively responded and confirmed their participation. One expert did not respond, and two experts were not able to participate due to lack of time or explaining that they only had time to engage in one research project at a time. Another expert who confirmed participation had to cancel on the day of the appointment, because he was sick. Due to time limits, it was not possible to reschedule the appointment with this expert. Thus, in total sixteen expert interviews were planned, but only fifteen interviews were conducted. Some cases, intentional interviewees redirected the project to one of their colleagues of the other appropriate departments. For instance, when education was only offered for children and the expert had no knowledge about Gen Y, the project was redirected to a colleague with expertise in the department communication or exhibition. In total, ten managers/ heads of departments and five employees working within the museum industry were interviewed. With the exception of one

Skype interview (in June), the interviews were either conducted in the interviewees’ offices, in the museum’s employee café area, or in the visitor’s café. The choice to include the Skype interview, though much later than the rest, was made on the basis of its expected value.

An approval certificate (Appendix 2), together with terms and conditions, was printed.

Upon receipt, e-mail approval was given by all respondents to record the interview. The interviews were semi-structured and conducted in Dutch with reference to the printed interview guide. The interview guide (Appendix 3) featured thirteen questions, some of which included bullet points. During the interview, some notes were made by pen on the printed interview guide. The interview was constructed in four parts: introduction, value proposition, customer relationship, and channel. The introduction contained questions about the museum’s developments and challenges, and what the institution currently does to serve young adults.

The three other parts mirrored the theoretical framework of this thesis.

Most interviews followed a similar order, yet in some cases parts of the interview guide had already been discussed. In these cases, some questions were either discussed more generally or skipped entirely, leading to a slightly different order of questions. The direction of each interview also varied because of interesting topics coming up and leading to additional questions. The duration of the interviews varied between 24 minutes and one hour and 10 minutes, but most interviews were conducted within 45 minutes. One respondent had too little time, and so the introduction was skipped in order to make way for the final three parts, considering they are most important topics for answering the research question - and sub- questions. Another reason for shorter duration of one of the expert interviews was the absence of Gen Y within the museum’s customer segmentation, which made it difficult to answer questions on this particular area. All interviews were conducted between 8th April and

9th June. Transcriptions were made of each audio- recorded interview.

3.4. Validity and reliability

To enhance internal validity, an interview guide was developed following the theoretical framework and conceptual model. In order to enhance reliability, any difficult terms and topics rephrased into understandable questions. Every interviewee was also given the expected age range for Gen Y. On the basis of the theoretical framework –, constructed from scholarly literature –, it was possible to isolate patterns across institutional answers. Similar and dissimilar patterns were revealed through comparing cases in the in-depth -interviews

(Rynes & Gephart, 2004; Yin , 2009; Gibbert & Ruigrok, 2010) Yet conducting in depth interviews is also time consuming (Rynes & Gephart, 2004).

The goal of this research was to collect a broad range of expertise over the field of interest. A diverse sample has been sought in several ways: variance exists on the basis of three selection criteria, and were taken into account to ensure a varied sample of museum 38

experts. The most important selection criteria in which, variance can be found is in the expert’s field of expertise, and can be linked to museum objectives from the theoretical framework. This selection criterion leads to expertise from different angles. Second, experts work within different museum categories, which also leads to varied results. A museum expert working in an Art history museum might have a different opinion about aspects of the theoretical framework than an expert working in a film museum. Last, location of the museum were the expert works was taken into account, as location can be an important aspect of attracting young people or not. These selection criteria ensure external validity. All experts work at reputable museums, meaning those which have received the most awards or nominations for innovation, education and creating public and economic value significant expertise in museum, so enhancing the reliability of the research. Furthermore, low inference of the researcher during the interview with the expert was pursued, in order to enhance reliability. Thus, the role of the researcher was on the background, while the expert had the leading role in the interview. Interviews with experts require exploratory or responsive questioning (Ritchie, 2003). A professional differs from a layman because they are in a dominant/ authoritative position. Their behaviour towards a question might, however, be influenced by their own position, which can lead to issues, such as concerns about time.

Therefore, time matters were clearly informed in advance of the interview (Ritchie, 2013). All steps and stages of research are saved accurately, in order to maintain transparency (Tracy,

2010). The interview guide and transcriptions used in the data collection and analysis process are all saved, making replication of this research possible (Gibbert & Ruigrok, 2010).

3.5. Data analysis

After the data collection process, all transcriptions were imported into the qualitative data software program ATLAS.ti. The program was used for both a content analysis and a 39

comparative analysis. The analysis was established by combining a deductive and inductive approach. The base of the theoretical thematic analysis was a deductive approach. Yet additional components were discovered within the main categories of the theoretical framework, leading to new components established through an inductive approach.

First, the concepts of the theoretical framework were translated into a list of codes, where the transcriptions were read and interesting segments were selected by marking individual pieces of the text. Different colours were also assigned to the various framework concepts; in Atlas T.I., all these concepts were known as “families”.

Secondly, the text was grouped and organized by assigning one, or many, codes to pieces of text. Not only were the codes of the initial list used but also new interesting codes were created and assigned to pieces of text, which mirrors the inductive approach. During this step, the codes were to each other linked (e.g. “Facebook”) was a part of “Social media”, which is part of “distribution channel” and to their overarching families (e.g. “Channel”).

Data were also visualized in networks (Appendix), in which relations and patterns were made visible. Conclusions were drawn after the pattern- matching process in which patterns and relationships between institutions were explored.

4. Results

Within this chapter, the empirical findings of this study are discussed. This chapter begins with a short summary of the most prevalent challenges considered by respondents. Following this, a thematic analysis of all constructs of the conceptual framework is provided and evolving patterns are described.

4.1. Challenges

Experts described diverse and interesting challenges related to their museum as a whole or to their function . The most prevalent challenge patterns concerned digitization and attracting audiences. Almost all interviewees explained the challenge of coping with the digitized world.

The majority of museums explain how digitization asks for innovation, knowledge and financial resources. One of the respondents explains that it is challenging to offer more in this

“spoiled online world” (M3), where people might be interested in the museum and it is collection but cannot easily visit to the museum.

Another distinct challenge for the majority of museums was in attracting new audiences. Results show the challenge of attracting audiences is twofold: increasing audience diversity, and attracting visitors and maintaining them as customers. Audience diversity received a lot of attention among experts and continues to be a challenge. The most prevalent challenge of audience diversity has to do with age. Most experts said that they still find it challenging to attract young people. Some experts stated that they found it important, though challenging, to attract different groups –, with different races and educational backgrounds –, within Gen Y. Three out of fifteen respondents pointed out that Gen Y is not their priority target audience.

4.2. Generation Y

Experts explain customer segmentation is arranged in different ways by museums, influencing whether and in which way value can be created for Gen Y. The majority of experts states Gen

Y is included in the customer segmentation of the museums they work at and imply that value can be created for them in several ways. The role that Gen Y plays for museums has four directions. Most experts state that Gen Y is an important target audience and value propositions are created in different ways for them compared to other target audiences. Five 41

experts explain Gen Y is important and included in their customer segment, but that they are not a primary target audience, nor are their value propositions uniquely designed for Gen Y consumers. A minority of experts state that Gen Y consumers, over 25 years of age (young professionals) are covered in their target audience but that younger Gen Y consumers are not a priority customer segment. The last direction, substantiated by the minority of just 2 respondents, explains that Gen Y is not part of their customer segment, and thus value propositions are not directed at towards this audience. One expert M9 is an outlier, as her function is encouraging younger participation in museums and organizes events including;

Museumnacht.

4.3. Value proposition

The perceived value of the museum’s’ visitors is constructed through the following elements, with reference to the new business model (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010):

4.3.1. Participation and Interactivity

Gen Y participation in museums has many facets, varying from yoga lessons, lectures and events in the museum, and offered interactive media. One expert in particular works within two organizations with the mission to enhance youth participation in museums. Although most museums imply young adults like to be interactive, one outlier (M9) explains that, in her experience, when working together with programmers from museums to organize

Museumnacht: “It is always thought that young people don’t feel like doing interactive things.

Contrarily qualitative research at N8 has shown young people like the ‘do it yourself’ parts of

Museumnacht most.”

Individual vs. social participation

The pattern of participation can be divided into two forms of individual and social participation. All fifteen experts explain visitors’ participation, especially individual participation, is important. Half of the experts state that social participation is offered in their museum. Both forms of participation are offered offline and online. Although online social and individual interactivity is growing in museums, three respondents in particular explain that they have consciously developed new offline forms of social and individual participation as a response to the constantly connected world. These offline forms take Gen Y back to basics, ask for in-house participation during their museum visit in the form of drawing (M8 &

M15), and dice games relevant to the art in the museum, both of which are intended to be social participation. The dice game, however, is more intended for families, while the drawing task is intended for Gen Y visitors.

M8 states: “With our drawing campaign, which appeals many young people we give them drawing books and pencils and ask people to stop taking photos and instead invite them to draw what they see.” This traditional form of participation is also complemented by online participation, as people are encouraged to upload their drawings of one of the Rijksmuseum’s objects on social media to use hashtags (#Hierteekenen).

Interactive apps

A pattern was found in the increase of interactive museum apps, that ask for visitor participation. Interactive apps, designed by museums, and external apps such as social media, can enhance the museum’s visual culture. Eleven of fifteen respondents offer interactive apps, of which most are museum- related with basic information, intended for all visitors, and nine respondents explain that their museums apps have a higher interactive goal, related to specific exhibitions, and are used by a younger audience. These apps can be used during the museum 43

visit as well as in the pre- - and post-visit stage. M7: “We have an upcoming surrealism exhibition and we’re working on a surrealistic game matching the exhibition [...] we hope that the game will even live its own life outside of the museum.”

Mood apps, games (sometimes merged with education) and multimedia tours (both individual and social) are some examples of interactive apps. Experts explain how these apps can encourage participation in education, by adding entertainment and offering more layers behind objects. Some experts wish to develop interactive apps in the future and add augmented reality. M14: “That will be a big project with an augmented reality app transferring the feeling of how it is to be on the ship.”

In addition to museum apps, all experts explain how social media can enhance social participation. The majority name Facebook and Instagram as the most important external apps that embrace participation for Gen Y. M3: “Art Inspiration of Demand, things like that, ask for people’s participation and to share their opinion.” Only one expert explains the museum she works at uses Snapchat and few experts wish to deploy this channel.

Events

Rijks Extra, StedelijkX, Vincent op Vrijdag, Exposed and Museumnacht are examples focused on encouragement of younger participation. Thursday or Friday night events work well as value propositions for Gen Y customers. M9: “A night in the museum with a drink and some extra touch-points works well to attract young people.” Another sort event named by one expert (M5) in which especially Gen Y participates are hackathons. Computer programmers, graphic designers, and other software connoisseurs intensively collaborate on software projects.

The tension between art and commerce can be present when it comes to events in museums, which is expressed by a few experts. For some, Museumnacht leans strongly on the 44

commercial side. M3: “Deliberately we don’t take part in a Museumnacht, you can throw a party anywhere and dance, drink beer […] I believe the art should stay central.” Other experts working at museums located outside the bigger cities explain how their location impedes them in taking part in Museumnacht. These experts explain own events are organized in the form of festivals, lectures, Thursday and Friday night, or own “mini Museumnacht”.

Co- creation

Of all respondents, fourteen state that their museum offers some form of co-created value where visitors do not simply participate in a programme but actually create something.

Experts explain the positive effects of co-creation; people feel they are involved and get the chance to share their opinion and/ or creativity. This form of participation takes several directions, varying from co-created products and designs to co-created exhibitions.

Co-creation projects are especially offered online, and three respondents explain how the public can participate in co-creating physical exhibitions. Three of the interviewed museums began the project Mixmatch museums with the public. This initiative is an opportunity for the public to build an online exhibition; the best ideas are then brought to life in one of the six physical museums. Experts explain that young adults are very much attracted to participating in these co-created projects: M11: “Through these participation exhibitions, we reached a much younger audience than we normally do.” Although the majority of experts seems positive about co-creation one outlier is more sceptical about co-created physical exhibitions. M3: “Eventually, people come for our triple A art, not for amateur projects, moreover we don’t have space for these type of exhibitions, perhaps in the future when online museums become a reality it could work.” Another expert believes that people only want to participate on a certain level; people like to give their opinion and make choices, but they do not want to curate an entire exhibition. 45

4.3.2. Innovation

The majority of respondents realize that innovation is an important value proposition and therefore try to offer new products and services. M8: “Our museum had a very good reputation but we scored very low on innovation and creativity, thus we looked at opportunities to solve this.” Innovation is offered in many ways, varying from apps and games to new sorts of exhibitions. M12: “We are working on a 3D bridge in Amsterdam, not consciously intended to specifically attract Gen Y, but I think innovations like this are appealing to that generation.”

Experts agree that innovations can in most cases only be realized when financial resources are available. M3: “In the past we weren’t able to campaign in China, but now we can really start editing potentially throughout China by using Weibo, a Chinese microblog website, that’s great and was formerly not possible.” The value of new products and services is, in most cases, related to technology. Interactive apps and websites are particularly highlighted by experts, as they are said to offer value for Gen Y. Four experts explain how they think young people should become part of the innovative process. M5: “We want innovation to become part of the visitor’s experience; innovation should not only be devised by people over 50.”

Virtual museum

A pattern was found in the offered or expressed interest of establishing virtual museums. M3:

“ I’d really like our museum to build an online museum […] Nothing beats the experience to be in front of a beautiful painting, everything we create outside our physical museum should be an experience too, and not just a simple website.” Four experts explicitly state that they wish to digitize all their museum’s objects and eventually build online museums, making access to their collections possible from anywhere in the world. Among others, the 46

Rijksmuseum is one of the precursors. These experts explain how new technologies offer opportunities to cope with their space limits, but require great financial resources.

Depot solutions

Another pattern among museum experts concerned solutions are needed to make objects in depots more publicly available. Some experts explained how they cope with the problems of space limitations, and how they think about innovative solutions and projects. M7: “It’s usually a lot what museums have stored in their depots, in our museum we have 7% exhibited and 93% is stored in depots.” Three groups exist within the pattern of depot solutions, regarding the role of the public. Four experts state how they have built exhibitions from the depot; three experts explain these exhibitions were co-created with the public while the other expert explains co-creation was not the intention of the depot exhibition. This last expert explains the exhibition “High and Lows from the Depot” was established because it is a pity that not all pieces, whether for loan reasons or flaws, are not made accessible for the public. A total of 52 pieces were selected by the museum, one by the public, and all were exhibited in the museum.

Co-creation played a bigger part in exhibitions from the depot, called Mixmatch museums. The Amsterdam museum, Kröller-Müller Museum, Groninger museum and three other museums (not included in this study) worked on exhibitions in which the public was greatly involved, co-creating the exhibitions of one of the museums.

Experts also explain co-created exhibitions can be created without the ‘normal’ public. An exhibition project showing objects from the depot, titled “De Wereld Draait Door pop- up museum II” was created with famous Dutch people. The depots of nine Dutch museums (comprising four of the interviewed museums) took part to display their “hidden” artworks in this initiative. Guests from the TV program De Wereld Draait Door, chose a 47

museum and co-created an exhibition – together with museum professionals from

Maurithshuis, Boijmans van Beuningen, Kroller Muller and the Scheepvaartmuseum – from of depot objects. The exhibition of nine rooms could be visited offline in the Allard Pierson museum as well as online for a virtual museum experience, including 360- degree views.

The experts participating in this project explain how these exhibitions can take new directions and attract new audiences. One of these respondents (M6) explains how their guest curator, Sander van de Pavert, made a humorous audio tour. M6: “That form of storytelling took a new direction in which a fun element was added to the royal.”

In addition to the exhibitions formed from objects obtained from museum’s depots, one experts mention how the Boijmans van Beuningen is developing a new building called the Collectiegebouw. In this building, all objects stored across seven depots, will be stored and made accessible to the public. M7: “We will do everything to make the work behind the scenes visible for the public.” M7 explains how this building, opening in 2018, will not have a regular exhibition character. Instead, the “machine room of the museum” will become a public depot in which visitors can see restorations, framing, and cleaning operations of objects. This experts explains that activities in this new building are combined with learning practice, and can enhance public value.

Yet, she also explains that a project like this is also very challenging, as it requires financial resources and a number of organizational decisions on, for example, ticketing and how to make the distinction between a museum and a Collectiegebouw clear to visitors.

4.3.3. Education vs. entertainment

All experts stressed education as one of the most important matters in the museum. M3:

“Education is everywhere because it’s all about knowledge transfer.”

Yet there exists a variance in opinions among experts regarding the balance between entertainment and education. The majority of experts believe that entertainment is the key to education, which is the loftier goal. One education expert explains how this balance is ascertained by the exhibition. M14: “It depends on the exhibition; sometimes it’s mainly fun and sometimes mainly serious but the total image should be in balance.”

Entertainment can make exhibitions with complex ideas a bit lighter. Amusement, for instance through organizing events with young partners, attracts new audiences. Experts explain that entertainment can enhance education through organized events for Gen Y,. yet five respondents explain that entertainment should not claim the force majeure. One outlier

(M4) believes that events such as Museumnacht should not take place at all, and states

“People have to like a museum in the first place, so we’re not organizing an extra activity to increase entertainment.” Other experts declare education is always the goal and entertainment a tool to achieve the goal. Some experts state that maintaining the balance between education and entertainment indeed is challenging: M10: “I think it’s important to keep in mind that when you get very excited about the way of amusing the public, you’ll see entertainment as the goal, instead of education and that’s the pitfall.”

Informal learning

Four respondents emphasize the informal aspect of learning and explain that intellectual motivation should not be too heavy. One respondent (M5) labels this “free choice learning”.

Informal learning should stay informal and not come across as educational but rather as fun; if this is effective, then the learning will be subtle and unconscious. M12: “It shouldn’t be named education, instead it should be fun, we had a nice exhibition catalogue designed in a

Glossy format with fun yet instructive stories about the art, artists and exhibitions.”

Digital storytelling

Experts state Apps, websites and games can function as entertaining tools for the transfer of education. Entertainment can add fun elements to the learning process. Seven museum experts mentioned educational apps that are especially designed for use during museum visits, but in some cases can also be used outside of the museum. These apps require interactivity and imagination, resulting in personalized experiences. Three of the museum apps from the interviewed experts, match individuals’ tastes to art movements and artists. By means of such apps, research becomes more fun, and. some even have humorous elements. New multimedia apps from four museums, were built on the central concept of storytelling, where education becomes multi- layered and combined with emotional aspects.

Lifelong learning

One expert (M5) named the concept of “Lifelong Learning”, asserting that learning is not only for children. Common ground was found among all fifteen respondents for this concept, as they all believed that people can continue learning, especially within museums. M10: “You can keep on learning, in our case about Amsterdam […] Education is a very important goal for our museum and not only children but also older audiences get to work themselves with themes of exhibitions. This expert how a museum lab, with much input of different target audiences, asks for more watching and reading which attracts young adults too.

4.3.4. Personalization

All respondents, except M13 said that their institution offers personalized products and services, from CRM communication, through merchandise, services and , events, to co- creation projects.

M12: “For our upcoming exhibition (De Nieuwe Wilden) about expressionism we developed a matching app measuring ‘“how wild you are’” […] It shows whether you’re more an expressionist or more a cubist and a painting that matches you.”

All experts explain CRM systems are important, so newsletters can be personalized.

M6: “We are one of the first museums soon introducing personalization based on server behaviour […] When you’re Japanese or browsing our website from Japan, the content on our website will respond to the information we have from you.” An interesting issue with regard to personalization has to do with privacy. M3: “Will people like it or find it creepy when their name pops up (“Hello, welcome Milou”) on their phone as soon as they enter the museum and they’ve bought their ticket in advance?”

Touch-points

The majority of experts agree how different touch-points help to create personalized, tangible products and memories for their users/visitors. M6: “Last year, people could figurate in photos of “Anatomy Lessons of Dr. Tulp”, one of Rembrandt’s famous paintings.”

Experts explain how photo booths and other touch-points invite visitors to take pictures in the exhibition or event space work very well. Captured memories are told to be important for the post visit stage of the customer journey.

Multimedia apps and games also enhance personalized experiences. When visitors are able to choose their own storyline in a multimedia tour that is, based on their own personal interests, their museum visits become more customized. In addition to personalized products, games and apps, events can also function as touch-points for Gen Y. Services can be specifically aimed at Gen Y, or segmented completely differently; Asian art lovers, are a personalized group, as they are a specific customer segment (M6).

Co-creation

An important distinction exists between value that can be enhanced through co-creation for selected participators, and co-creation offered for the public, without selections. One expert explains how the Rijksmuseum’s co-created project, Rijksstudio, offers both forms.

Everybody can download and work with the images of the museum’s objects, create portfolios, and even participate in the Rijksstudio award, where young creative graduates are tasked with making their own designs with one of the Rijksmuseum’s objects (M8).

Experts explain that co-creation is valuablee for Gen Y consumers in its personalization and increased involvement. First, co-creation embraces personalized experience. M5: “With the RFID chip ring visitors could register, login and create personal digital portfolio filled with media production during the museum visit […] record yourself reading the news from the autocue, the video was automatically saved in your profile.” Other experts emphasize the value proposition of co-creation lies in a feeling of involvement. M11:

“We wrote all the names of everybody who took part on a blue ribbon and that was a great success of the exhibition; everybody was taking pictures of their name under Van Gogh’s on the wall.”

4.3.5. Design

The majority of respondents declare design to be very important; most respondents point to the design of exhibitions, posters and websites. M13: “People have different needs than they did ten years ago. Thus, the design of exhibitions should be adjusted to these needs.” Experts also note the importance of the design of products in museum shops and magazines.

Experience enhancement

Experts explain how the design, use of materials, and colours can be matched to the exhibition and its intended ambiance. M10: “During the Iron age exhibition, all the whole design of the exhibition got an iron metal look, the benches, the walls […] which made it very tangible in some kind of way.” The way space is designed can enhance value propositions for the consumer, not only in terms of its aesthetic components but also in the way other senses are triggered by the museum’s design. Some experts name music as important, and music is often used in audio- or multimedia tours, of temporary exhibitions to transfer a specific ambiance or feeling. Even smell can be a part of the design of an exhibition. M13: “In the dollhouse, we use scent capsules, very subtle though.”

One experts explains she finds it very important that a museum visitor comes into another world. M7: “It starts at the entrance and our exceptional cloakroom, the chair you’re sitting […] during the whole visit design plays an important role, therefore, I’m happy with my function presentation so I can pay close attention to design.” Design should ensure that visitors get the best experience. Museums want to avoid the character of a Musée Fatigue, implying that the route through the museum is tiring (M4).

Several experts note that storytelling emerges in exhibition design. The design of an exhibition can require interactivity and thus become livelier. M10: “We designed a space which makes you think you are standing in the subway.”

Collaborations

Exhibition designs are often made in collaboration with professional designers. Some museums work with the same designers. M12: “We always work with a solid designer who designs all our displays and from thereon we adjust where needed.” Contrary, other experts state that they think they should change designers for each exhibition and look for designers 53

that match the theme of the exhibition. Five experts explain they have worked with Gen Y designers or students. One expert explains they work from the User Centre Design principle, which implies when something new is developed users, or user group, are taken into designs’ account.” Working with Gen Y designers gives a clear image of the style that’s appealing to them:.M5: “Very funny, it’s a very eclectic style which is attractive to gen Y, mixing old and new elements.”

Museum identity

Experts explain how design can also increase a museum’s recognisability as a brand, and so design also plays a prominent role in the communication with the public. M6: “The design of the temporary exhibitions alternates, but the campaigns outside the museum should have one clear design which contributes to recognizing the museum.” Experts emphasize museums should have an outstanding design. M9: “people receive an overload of information so I think a clear house style is very important, we work with bright colours.”

Frequent museum visitors are interested in aesthetic traits, implying they attach values to the way exhibitions and related museum products are created and constructed. M14: “Pass a poster of the Stedelijk Museum and you will recognize it is the Stedelijk without being able to read what it says […] that’s what you want to achieve; a clear house style.”

4.4. Customer relationship

Patterns exist for customer relationships in all three stages of the customer journey, and, PR, marketing and communication are important contributing factors to these stages. M9:

“Aftercare is very important, by giving them something to take home or tagging people in pictures on Facebook after the event, the visitor’s experience is extended.”

All museum experts imply that customer relationships are highly important. Yet a variance among experts exists with reference to customer relationships, particularly for the customer segment containing Gen Y. Although all experts explain they value relationships with Gen Y, three explain that Gen Y is not a priority for their museum and, therefore, no serious efforts are made to intensify relationships with this group. Another group, the majority of experts, explains that they do try to intensify relationships with Gen Y, but not more than with any other groups. Four experts express that they do a lot to enhance customer relationships with Gen Y, especially M9 who is focused on younger participation.

A striking pattern is the challenge to keep audiences –, including Gen Y –, after one visit. Two museum experts explain how they struggle to build customer relations with Gen Y because of their unusual location. Both respondents explain that people, especially students, find it expensive and time consuming to get to Otterloo (M11) and Drenthe (M13). M13:

“Young people don’t travel for special events that we organize, so that’s difficult.” Experts name several ways of how they try to intensify their relationship with Gen Y; the most striking patterns referencing customer relationships with Gen Y are discussed below.

CRM

Customer relationship management (CRM) is considered a powerful tool in enhancing customer relationships. Thirteen experts mention how CRM is very important in gaining knowledge about their different customer segments. M1: “I always really emphasize my colleagues should add new people to the system and explain why they are interesting.” Three experts explain they wish to improve their own CRM system.

Events

A pattern for enhancing relationships with Gen Y concerns museum events. 55

Events can extend a visitor’s experience outside a regular museum visit. All experts state events are organized for visitors of all ages. One recent phenomenon, named by ten out of fifteen respondents, is events organized outside regular opening hours.

One expert explains how N8 makes museums more accessible to a younger crowd and organizes Museumnacht once a year. All respondents from Amsterdam museums take part in

Museumnacht. Some museums outside of Amsterdam even have their own version of

Museumnacht. Another group of experts deliberately do not organize a Museumnacht because of their adverse location or because it does not match their principles; one respondent believes it replaces art’s centrality. A contrary view of taking part in Museumnacht is that it may attract new audiences. M1: “The meaning of Museumnacht is to attract and connect new people to the museum and to give them an experience, which is representative to how much fun a museum can be.” Yet, the majority of experts that organize a Museumnacht believe such a night has a strong entertainment characteristic.

Furthermore, eight respondents explain that they organize own events that are specifically targeted at a young crowd. The majority of these events take place once a month, on Thursday and Friday nights, with music, a drink and often a lecture related to the exhibition. These events are meant to attract new audiences. Yet one respondent (M3) expresses her struggle: “Vincent op Vrijdag is very successful, attracting YHB’s (Young, Hip and Beautiful) in my opinion, it is still too much ‘white only’ at this moment […]so how do we attract ROC youngsters and others?” Three respondents who mention they target young people for their events state that they do not show up. More exclusive events for Gen Y are offered by five museums. These events are related to membership clubs, with special events organized exclusively for members of these clubs, in which Gen Y consumers can participate.

Young busy professionals are particularly attracted to events organized outside working hours. Thus, there is an increase of events organized specifically for Gen Y. 56

4.4.1. Co-creation

The majority of experts explain how involving consumers and asking for their interactivity through co-created projects enhance relationships with consumers, including Gen Y. It is reasoned how co-creation enhances customer relationships for two groups. The majority of respondents explain co-created projects intensify relations with the broader public and that they are also intended for a more specific group of Gen Y; the young creators. Four respondents underpin young creator traits being young talented artists/ scientists, or students within the field of museums, and that relationships with young creators can be enhanced through co-created projects. Gen Y students, designers and young professionals are involved in co-creating projects or products together with the museum. M1: “FOAMlab is a traineeship for young professionals, in which talented thinkers come up with ideas […] I’m seriously surprised by how strongly their opinion is taken into account, none of their ideas are too crazy.” Three experts explain they work on co-created projects with students, and how involving them and giving them responsibility can strengthen relations. M5: “Young creators, as they are called, are involved in the development of applications for youngsters […] Day and night, for 24 hours over 200 persons work together, some kind of creation machine, which results in really interesting possible solutions.”

Co-creation is particularly relevant within the experience economy and business model innovation (Pine II and Gilmore, 1998; Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010; Pine II and

Gilmore, 2014). Co-creation involves consumers, which then enhances customer relationships. The co-creation of value can stimulate a sense of community among consumers, which is important for Gen Y consumers (Rowley et al., 2007; Davies; 2009; Bolton et al.,

2013).

4.4.2. Networks

Internal vs. external networks

Internal online networks are especially sustained through social media & CRM and offline networks, for instance during events. All experts declare how important internal and external networks are for their organization in reaching different customer segments. Twelve experts deliberately take part in external networks to enhance new relationships with Gen Y. Experts give examples of nodes represented by an organization as well as by individuals. Several experts mentioned external organizations, such as ARTtube and N8, more than once. Eight of the studied museums work together with N8 and take part in the annual Museumnacht in

Amsterdam. Another external network given by two respondents was Lowlands. The summer festival will be filled with people of Gen Y. The external network ARTtube, working together with museums, collaborates with Lowlands, thus interesting for creating new audiences.

Experts also explain how influencers and ambassadors can reach new networks and new audiences. M15 describes one of their latest projects; Stedelijk X, which was intended to get a greater and more frequent footfall from young citizens from Amsterdam. The museum selected six diverse influencers, each with large networks, who are interested in art and design. A kick-off event was organized, and they created their own audio tour linked to art in the museum that could be listened to on Soundcloud, a popular medium among Gen Y and was spread over these influencers’ networks. Through these influencers, new audiences both offline (through events) and online (through social media; Instagram and Facebook) were reached. Four experts name ambassadors, influencers and vloggers as some examples of these nodes and that these individuals have their own networks, which makes cooperation with these people particularly interesting.

Online vs. offline networks

All museum experts state that both online and offline networks are important in enhancing customer relationships with Gen Y. Seven museums are represented by the video channel

ARTtube for art and design, which draws attention on fourteen museums online and also offline on for the Lowlands music festival Lowlands. Offline networks are often gathered during events on Thursday and Friday nights often in the museum(garden) and sometimes at a local venue outside the museum. Online networks play a big part for all experts. Online networks vary from own museum fan bases on social media to external or museum’s own online magazines. Furthermore, experts mention ambassadors and influencers with whom museums collaborate have significant online networks. Although the majority of experts expressed that online networks are growing in importance, one outlier (M9) believes offline networks are much more important than online, and considers word of mouth (WOM) to be very powerful, especially in a relatively small city like Amsterdam.

Experts explain that they work with vloggers, who have incredible online networks, thus reaching Gen Y through different media such as Facebook and Instagram. Other ambassadors have large offline networks.

Friends and membership clubs

Another emerging pattern with reference to museum support and building customer relationships with Gen Y is the phenomenon of friends and membership clubs. Memberships and friends clubs vary in exclusivity. Prices range from 50 euro’s to 450 euro’s a year.

Experts also mention non-membership programs that attract Gen Y are: Groninger Indsiders,

Stedelijk X, Exposed and Maurits &. Events and activities are linked to the examples above and organized for an audience, including Gen Y visitors.

Table 2. Young membership clubs

Membership Club Age Price (per annum)

Club Foam 25-40 € 450

Rijks Extra 18-40 € 50

Young Stedelijk 25-40 € 300

@Boijmans 18-45 € 100

Customer relationships are strongly associated with the way in which museums deploy their channels and value propositions. A customer- centric view is when museums take the wishes and demands of their different customer segments into account, and thus require targeted, audience focused strategies. These strategies respond to the specific wishes and demands of the customer segment; Gen Y (Bakhshi and Throsby, 2010; Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010; de Swaan Arons et al., 2014). Intensifying the relationships with Gen Y consumers is achieved directly, such as through co-creation and indirectly, for instance through networks.

4.5. Channel

All experts explain how their museums make use of their own channels, both offline and online. External channels can be beneficial for attracting new audiences that would otherwise not be reached through the museum’s own channels. Online channels are merged with offline channels on all three levels of the customer journey, as discussed below:

4.5.1. Communication channel

An emerging topic regarding how content is communicated is visual culture. M1: “We live in a visual culture, thus when you clearly show what you offer as a museum this can be a strong factor”. Visual content has become highly important, if not the most important part of today’s communication channel. One expert emphasized museum visitors are characterized as

visually oriented people and, therefore, aesthetics are crucial while communicating content. In line with the development of this visual culture and the traits of museum visitors, most experts state that images and videos are the most important methods of communication. Yet expert explain museums do continue to communicate content through traditional communication channels, such as posters and museum blurbs underneath objects. The majority of experts explain that nowadays, traditional media options are expensive. M9: “The use of posters is expensive and more effective for Museumnacht, in which the collective of Amsterdam museums is emphasized through striking posters, than for Exposed, which easily vanishes in today’s information overload.”

The other most prevalent pattern related to communication is the prominence of

(digital) storytelling in museums. Eight out of fifteen experts say storytelling now plays a bigger role than it once did. M3: “Our communication is built through the concept of storytelling.” Experts explain that storytelling is the perfect tool for balancing entertainment with education , making the latter attractive for the broader public and is especially attractive for Gen Y consumers. Storytelling makes the transfer of content more vivid and takes museum experience to a higher level.

4.5.2. Distribution channel

New media vs. traditional media

All experts state both offline and online media channels, as well as social media, are deployed to transfer content to their consumers, including Gen Y. However, the deployment of social media is represented differently across institutions, leading to different patterns. The most deployed (social) media among the museums where experts within this study work are:

Facebook, Instagram, Arttube websites, (online) magazines, and the institutions’ own apps, including multimedia tours. Lesser mentioned media channels are: YouTube, Snapchat, 61

Twitter, Wikis, and Pinterest. A few mentioned outliers are: Google+, Flicker, LinkedIn,

Soundcloud and Periscope. The majority of experts emphasize how people, especially Gen Y, share through digital channels. M7: “More than half of the visitors were taking pictures of the clown exhibition, photo-shoots really, when you search for it on social media you see clowns everywhere.”

Facebook is deployed by all museums, yet its function and relevance results in three rather diverse opinions: Some experts strongly believe Facebook to be a commercial strategic channel, leading to more attendance, a contrary view is that its function is shifting; where it was once a great advertising channel, it now only informs about events. Two other experts believe Facebook is more appropriate for older customer segments but the majority of respondents are neutral about this medium. Most museums make use of Twitter but the majority of the respondents agree that Twitter is losing its prominence in social media strategies. M8: “Twitter is not a prominent social medium to reach Gen Y but more appropriate for press and opinion matters.” The majority of experts believe Instagram to be a useful tool for sharing visual content and have an account. Moreover, Instagram reaches a relatively young audience through its own and through external channels. M15: “Stedelijk X

Rons Simpson had an incredible reach; through his social network, pictures received over

2000 likes!” One outlier questioned whether Instagram really adds value for the company.

Remarkably, only one of the of the museums (M15) currently uses the visual live medium Snapchat. The majority of museums is not yet familiar with Snapchat; two experts explain they have concrete plans to make a museum Snapchat account, and four respondents state they are willing to use Snapchat but do not currently use the channel. The appropriate use of social media needs well developed strategies, as they can be challenging, as states M1:

“Periscope and Snapchat brings along more resistance because of its live character, there is less direction and control, which make it challenging.” Five experts emphasize the need to 62

select which social media to use and think of which media offers the most. M3: “You can’t use all of them or deploy a medium half- ; it’s useless to post one picture a month on

Instagram, and we are still looking how to work with Google+; we have 5 million fans but we don’t really know this medium.” These experts state successful implementation and execution of social media requires time, knowledge and financial resources and content planning. Although digital distribution channels seem to rule in most museums, traditional media do continue to have a place. Six experts state that posters are still useful for attracting young audiences. M2 says: “We send our newsletter by post; perhaps we might do this digitally one day, but our audience wants to find our newsletter on the doormat.”

Furthermore, traditional media are also deployed on purpose with an underlying meaning by some museums. “Back to basics” media such as offline games and drawing opportunities are still offered parallel to many new types of media. Although the majority of respondents think digital storytelling channels enhance museum experience, an opposite view exists among experts; M11: “Multimedia tours and apps can be too distracting, so on purpose we created a very simple offline game in a box with dice.”"

Museum apps and projects

All experts state that they make use of external social media outlets. Most experts work at museums which have created their own apps, in which visual- is mixed with audio content, enhancing the visitor experience.Multimedia tours build on the concept of storytelling and show extensive layers of the objects in museums to enhance visitor experience. M6 says: “We hardly show any information next to the paintings and recommend visitors to download the free app.” Contrary; M11 says: “We experimented with an app, rated 9 […] people liked it but it was too distracting and did not add much so we’re back to our basic three buttons audio tour, also rated 9.” Moreover, this and several other experts explain Gen Y searches with their

own keywords on their mobile phone.”

One expert explains how ‘Rijksstudio’ is an innovative solution to the museum’s limited space, offering digitized collections and making them publicly accessible online. M8:

“Taco (Director of the Rijksmuseum) recently stated Neil Mac Gregor’s quote that a museum is everybody’s private collection.” Another respondent explains how virtual museums take personalization and co-creation to a higher level: the Scheepvaartmuseum offers people to create a collection at home or in the museum, even mix personal items with the museum’s own collection. The resulting exhibition can be saved and shared with friends or projected into one of the museum’s rooms. M14: “However, these projects need resources and bearing support at the museum, otherwise it cannot succeed.”

4.5.3. Sales channel

All experts explain their museums make use of their own sales channels, both offline (e.g. physical museum shop) and online (e.g. tickets/ web shop). M3: “Our online ticketing is growing fast […]30% is sold online and we want to increase to 50 %.” Contrary to this, four experts do not believe that many people, especially not Gen Y, buy their tickets in advance online. External channels such as tour operators, the Dutch railway NS and Booking.com are also used to maximize ticket sales. To clarify their branding, museums now offer more than tickets and basic cafés. FOAM magazine is developed and sold by the Foam Photography

Museum and is a well-known magazine on international scale. The expert of this museum

(M1) mentions a future question is: “Whether you split the magazine and sell these parts on

Blendle or that you digitize content and develop a pay module where people pay 5 euro’s

[…]and get a discount when buying the physical product.” Four experts say that they are willing to innovate in their museum’s shops in terms of supply, space and/or adding web shop. M3 explains The Van Gogh Museum has its own VGM Enteprises B.V., which was

specifically established for the distribution and sales of merchandise inspired by the collection of the museum and recently launched an online shop. The shop is an extension to visitors experience, where a purchase can materialize memories of the museum. M7: “Louisiana’s museum shop in Denmark is ideal to me […] people really come there to shop, another goal; yet related to the museum.” All experts highlight the necessity of having a museum shop.

Experts descriptions from the shop ranges from a small counter, wished to be bigger, near the cash register to a larger shop, and sometimes online extensions of web shop. In addition to ticketing and merchandise sales channels, four museums specifically name restaurants as important sources of income where museum visitors and non-visitors are concerned.

Chapter 5 Conclusion & Discussion

In this final chapter, a summary of the most important empirical findings is provided, followed by a discussion. Thereafter, the implications for practice are described. Lastly, the limitations of this study and recommendations for future research are given.

5.1. Summary of empirical findings

This qualitative research was developed with the goal of detecting how museums can strategically use experience economy principles to reach Gen Y. With reference to experience economy principles and new business models, empirical data were obtained through fifteen interviews with professionals working in the museum sector.

Most museums are public organizations and are expected to fulfil public value. Yet results show audience diversity remains a challenge for museums. Nevertheless, multiple efforts to increase the visitor experience are made by museums to reach new and maintain existing audiences. Gen Y consumers are encouraged to participate, especially through digital technologies but also offline in the form of events and drawing campaigns. Innovative ideas

and projects embrace the value of museum experience across all three stages of Gen Y’s customer journey. Museum offerings and exhibitions must take on new directions, in order to attract the attention of Gen Y. Co-creation is offered by museums both offline and online. Co- created exhibitions and projects invite the public to participate and thereby create new types of offers personalized to the individual. Furthermore, experts state museums are making more effort to maximize access to all objects in their ownership. Some museums digitize their objects and other experts wish to make them accessible online in future. Results show that interest in online and virtual museums is growing. The accessibility of digitized objects and virtual museums are online solutions to space limitations and audience reach. Making objects more accessible creates further value for the public. Offline solutions to space limitations are also evolving in the form of innovative public buildings as extensions to the museum. These buildings replace traditional depots, which have never been accessible to the public. Yet coping with digitization and innovation is challenging for museums. Innovative projects demand knowledge, time and financial resources.

Furthermore, multi-channel strategies are deployed by museums to reach Gen Y consumers. Two trends in particular; digital storytelling and visual culture affect how the value propositions are carried out. Digital storytelling takes museum experience to a higher level and is granted through interactive apps. Education remains one of the museum’ most important objectives, and is often combined with digital storytelling, emotion, humour and entertainment as a strategic tool to enhance the visitors experience. Multimedia museum apps,

Instagram and Snapchat are particularly important channels, as these match the rise of, storytelling, visual culture and the consumer behaviour of Gen Y. Museums do use multimedia apps and Instagram, but the use of Snapchat is still in its infancy. In addition, external channels - both offline and online - are strategically used by museums for reaching new Gen Y audiences. The museum’s own offline and online channels intensify relations, 66

especially the more established, though they are also used to attract new audiences.

Another trend for attracting Gen Y consumers are events organized by the museum itself or in collaboration. Collaborations with organizations within the museum industry, or cross-fertilized industries, give access to new networks and audiences of organizations (e.g. lowlands) and individual influencers (e.g. popular vloggers). Thursday and Friday nights are especially popular with Gen Y audiences.

5.2. Discussion of findings

From a social entrepreneurial perspective results show that experience economy principles are suitable, strategic tools for reaching Gen Y. New business models require museums to connect the customer segmentations to the other constructs; value propositions, channels and customer relationships (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). The results show that museums make efforts to provide offerings equivalent to other leisure institutions, such as interactive games and apps and, events organized at night. Simultaneously museums position themselves as innovators of unique leisure experiences, including co-created projects with the collection of the museum; creating competitive advantages among other leisure activities. These results are in line with Burton and Scott’s (2003) vision on positioning strategies for museums.

However, as expected results also confirm that museums still struggle to attract and retain

Gen Y consumers. Museum experts realize that it is important to stage visitor experiences and results confirm that customer orientation functions as the basis for museum strategies. These findings are in line with literature implying a customer value-based theory is crucial.

However, results also show that Gen Y is not always treated as a unique or even valuable customer segment. Although theory implies generations are very heterogeneous, and Gen Y is a particular important target, results show that Gen Y is not always included in customer segmentation or not served different from other customer segments. Therefore, findings of

this research reveal Mannheim’s theory of generations (1952) is not fully supported. Some museums do not segment on age at all and instead on knowledge, motivation and other visitor characteristics, which is in contrast with the theory of generations.

Pine II and Gilmore (1998) mention an experience can relate to more than one sort of experience varying from education; entertainment; esthetic or escapist experiences. Results show however, that especially entertainment and education, but also esthetic and escapist experiences are not mutually exclusive at all. Contrary; they are very suitable for combining and can actually reinforce each other. Therefore, implication for the experience economy theory is that experiences in which multiple sorts are combined is very effective. In museums, especially education and entertainment can enhance each other and make a museum visit a more attractive experience for more people. Furthermore, experience economy implies companies should stage experiences by using themes and compelling stories. The trend of digital storytelling, a strong pattern in the results, can be very well combined within the experience economy and is therefore recommended to include in theory as a strategic tool in staging museum experiences.

This study shows how co-created projects are offered on an individual level, such as

‘Rijksstudio’, and on a group level, for instance by involving young creators or students. In line with literature, results show that co-creation indeed enhances value proposition for - and customer relationships with Gen Y. However, this study also reveals the down side of co- creation. Davies (2009) already stated co-creation requires facilitation skills and clear agreements between involved parties. This study extends guidelines with reference to co- creation. Results imply that most people only want to co-create exhibitions to a certain extent, and not to follow through as it is too time-consuming. Therefore, the implication for theory is that input should be carefully matched to the type of co-creator and not ask for excessive input from the public, as this often decreases participation of the broad public. 68

Bakhshi and Throsby (2010) emphasize innovation, a crucial for the cultural sector, and explain museums “without walls” can answer to a museum’s struggle against space limitations, simultaneously enhancing public value by maximizing access to all objects.

Innovation functions as a value proposition for Gen Y consumers in the form of apps, games and co-creation platforms and projects. However, results also show how innovation can create value in new offline ways. Public depot building are still in its infancy but can increase public value and at the same time cope with museums space limits. Although, Gen Y is characterized as tech-savvy consumer, results also show how this generation is very much attracted in participating in offline drawing campaigns too. Recent literature on business models often only emphasizes innovation as a value proposition created through digital technologies

(Bakhshi & Throsby, 2010; Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). Therefore, a contribution to existing the existing management literature is that not only digital technologies, but also new offline products and services result in value propositions. Furthermore, the majority of experts state that digitizing collections and making virtual museums accessible demands specialists knowledge and financial resources.

The literature states that the most important reasons for non-visits are that people do not have an interest in museums, that they do not have enough time, or they prefer to spend time and money on other leisure activities (Prentice et al., 1997; Burton & Scott, 2003; Burton et al., 2009). While the first reason is personally identifiable and thus more persistent, results show how experience economy principles combined with new business models can help museums cope with latter two problems. An increase in events organized by museums outside work hours specifically for Gen Y is a solution that might overcome Gen Y’s lack of time during the day. A stream of literature emphasizes the importance of multichannel strategies and matching channels to customer segments (Eisner, 2005; Noble et al., 2009; Bolton et al.,2013). Along with the generation theory (Mannheim, 1952), it was 69

expected that multiple appropriate channels would be used by museums to reach the constantly connected Gen Y consumer. Although results show some museums do use media content planning and match channels to target audiences; some visual culture channels are not used at all or not in its optimal form. Instagram and Snapchat are effective media to transfer the trends of visual culture and even storytelling. Instagram is used by some museums, but with just one museum currently using Snapchat, an established and useful distribution channel for reaching Gen Y consumers, it can be concluded that the inclusion of visual culture is not optimized by museums.

Within this paper it is reasoned how external networks can help museums to reach new audiences, that would not otherwise be reached. This is especially the case for Gen Y. These results are in line with the institutional and organization theory, implying ties outside the own museum lead to new resources (Uzzi, 1997; Brito, 2001). The results show that nodes in these networks are represented by nodes in the form of organizations, such as Lowlands, and also by influential individuals with large networks. The implication for network theories is that ambassadors, influencers and vloggers function very well as individual nodes in new networks. These individuals have large online and offline networks themselves, which open doors and can connect museums to new networks and potential new Gen Y audiences.

Furthermore, results imply that cross-fertilized networks can be very beneficial in networking for museums.

5.3. Implications for practice

This study leads to several implications for practice. First, museums should position themselves as a leisure activity and also emphasize the aspects that are unique to a museum experience. Museums are encouraged to use new business models in combination with experience economy principles to create an ultimate museum experience and offers for a

range of audiences within Gen Y.

Second, the two trends of digital storytelling and visual culture should be used as strategic tools by museums. These trends can take experiences to a higher level for Gen Y.

Interactive (social) media, such as apps, multimedia tours and games, can generate more layers behind objects. Another crucial value proposition is design, which creates value in several ways. Museums can involve Gen Y by co-created design projects, use design as a strategic tool for their own brand identity and, use design to stage an unique museum experience. Digital storytelling adds emotions and humour, and make museum experiences more vivid for Gen Y. Moreover, storytelling is an effective tool of balancing education and entertainment. Museums are recommended to adopt visual culture in the communication with this customer segment. Instagram and Snapchat are appropriate social media channels for communicating a visual culture and matching Gen Y’s consumer behaviour. However, these social media channels are only effectively creating value when the content shared is frequent and up to date. Thus, museums need to consider whether they have and want to use their time and financial resources to keep these current. Facebook’s function has changed, less is shared by Gen Y public on this medium. Facebook is not the marketing source it used to be, instead it remains useful for communicating informative content about events and exhibitions with

Gen Y. An important implication therefore is that museums work with content planning and make deliberate choices about which media to deploy.

Third, it is important for museums to create online and physical touch-points, enhancing personalization, participation and the total experience. Some digital touch-points, such as the development of museum filters through Snapchat, require additional financial resources. Physical touch-points however, such as invitations to take pictures, are fairly easy for museums to implement. The added benefit of this is that Gen Y often shares this content on social media. Thus, museums could strategically respond to this trend by encouraging 71

people to use hashtags while sharing.

Fourth, museums are highly recommended to think of innovative offering. This study has shown that innovation can be enhanced online and offline. While online co-creation through portfolio’s can mean participation with no end point, offline co-created exhibitions are more effective in getting the public to participate to a certain (achievable) goal. Rather than asking people to create an entire exhibition of 50 separate pieces, it is recommended that museums ask people for their opinion or preferences for a few pieces.

A last recommendation for museums is to increase value and intensify relationships with Gen Y through events, sometimes with the aid of external channels. Thursday and Friday nights organized by the museum are attractive for Gen Y and a solution for their lack of time during the day. Furthermore, museums should think of interesting external channels, which could lead to new audiences for their museum. Cross-sector fertilized networks, with organizations and individual influencers as nodes can connect museums to new potential Gen

Y audiences.

5.4. Limitations and recommendations for future research

A new research area was explored with this study. Although qualitative research was most appropriate exploring this field of interest, qualitative research also leads to limitations. A disadvantage of qualitative research is that the results are not statistically generalizable. Semi- structured interviews with experts ensured the expert was given the leading role in the interview and the researcher stayed on the background. However, subjectivity cannot be avoided completely, which diminishes reliability. Furthermore, experts’ vision about the creation of experiences were revealed in this study. When making an inventory of public opinion about experience is the goal of future research; it is recommended to conduct a quantitative study. Measuring public opinion on a broad scale is best examined through 72

quantitative research designs. Experience economy exists in many industries and therefore it could be interesting to apply experience economy principles to other organizations within the cultural sector or in other (creative) industries. Lastly, this research area was focused on one particular customer segment. Generations vary and value propositions created by institutions should match the targeted generation or customer segment. Therefore, a recommendation for future research is to conduct research with other generations, making similarities and differences between generations visible.

6. References

Adamson,G., Pine, J., Steenhoven, van, T., & Kroupa, J. (2006). How storytelling can drive strategic change. Strategy & Leadership 34 (1), 36-41.

Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly 45 (3): 425-455.

Arend, R.J., & Bromley, P. (2009). Assessing the dynamic capabilities view: spare change, everyone? Strategic organization 7(1): 75-90.

Baden-Fuller, C., &J. Stopford (1992). The firm matters, not the industry, Section 8.2 from B. de Wit and R. Meyer, Strategy: Process, Content, Context, pp. 610-617.

Bannon, L., Benford, S., Bowers, J. and Heath, C. (2005). Hybrid design creates innovative museum experiences. Communication of the ACM 48(3), 62-65.

Bahkshi, H., & Throsby, D. (2010). Culture of innovation. Research report NESTA, 3-89.

Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage, Journal of Management, 17(1), pp. 99-120.

Bendapudi, N., & R. P. Leone (2003). Psychological Implications of Customer Participation on Co- Production, Journal of Marketing, 67, 14-28.

Bertacchini, E. and Morando, F. (2013) The future of museums in the digital age. International Journal of Art Management 15 (2), 60-72.

Bolton, R.N., Parasuraman, A., Hoefnagels, A., Migchels, N., Kabadayi, S., Gruber, T., Loureiro, Y.K., & Solnet, D. (2013). Understanding Generation Y and their use of social media: review and research agenda. Journal of Service Management, 23(3), 245-267.

Brass, D.J., Galaskiewicz, J., Greve, H.R., & Tsai, W. (2004). Taking stock of networks and organizations: a multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Journal 47 (6), 795- 817.

Brito, C.M. (2001). Towards an institutional theory of the dynamics of industrial networks. Journal of business & industrial marketing 16(3), 150-166.

Bryson, J., Crosby, B., & Stone, M. (2006). The design and implementation of cross sector collaborations: Propositions from the literature. Public Administration Review, special issue (December), 44-50.

Burton, C. & Scott, C. (2003). Museums: Challenges for the 21st century. Marketing Management, 5(2), 56-68.

Burton, C., Louviere, J. & Young, L. (2009). Retaining the visitor, enhancing the experience: identifying attributes of choice in repeat museum visitation. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 14, 21-34.

Casadesus-Masanell & Ricart, (2010). From strategy to business models and onto tactics. Long Range Planning, 43, 195-215.

Chesbrough, H (2010). Business model innovation: Opportunities and barriers. Long Range Planning, 43(2/3), 354-363.

Chuah, H. W., Malliga, M., & Ramayah, T. (2014). The effect of perceived value on the loyalty of Generation Y Mobile internet subscribers: a proposed conceptual framework. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 130, 532-541.

Cultuur in beeld. (2015, 12 november). Retrieved from https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2015/11/12/cultuur-in-beeld-2015

Currid, E. (2007). The economics of a good party: Social mechanics and the legitimization of art/culture. Journal of Economics and Finance, 31(3), 386-394.

Dacin, M.T., Oliver, C., & Roy, J.P. (2007). The legitimacy of strategic alliances: an institutional perspective. Strategic Management 28 (2), 169–187.

Davies, S.M. (2009). The co-production of temporary museum exhibitions. Museum management and curatorship 25 (3), 305-321.

Desarbo, W. S., Jedidi, K., & Sinha, I. (2001). Customer value analysis in a heterogeneous market. Strategic Management Journal, 22(9), 845-857.

De erfgoedmonitor- Collecties online [Dataset]. (2015, 19 juni). Geraadpleegd van http://erfgoedmonitor.nl/printpdf/392

Edvarsson, B., Enquist, B., & Johnston, R. (2005). Cocreating Customer value through hyperreality in the prepurchase service experience. Journal of Service Research, 8(2), 149- 161.

Eikhof, D.R. & Haunschild, A. (2007). For art’s sake! Artistic and economic logics in creative production. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 523-538. Eisner, S. P. (2005). Managing Generation Y. SAM advanced management journal, 70(4), 4-15.

Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2012). The museum experience revisited. Walnut Creek, California, USA: Left Coast Press Inc..

Fedeli, S., & Santoni, M. (2006). The government's choice of bureaucratic organisation: An application to Italian state museums. Journal of Cultural Economics, 30(1), 41-72.

Frey, B. S. (1998). Superstar museums: An economic analysis. Journal of Cultural Economics, 22(2), 113-125.

Frey, B.S. & Steiner, L. (2012). Pay as you go: A new proposal for museum pricing. Museum Management and Curatorship 27 (3),223-235.

Gibbert, M. and W. Ruigrok (2010) The ‘‘what’’ and ‘‘how’’ of case study rigor: Three strategies based on published work. Organizational Research Methods 13 (4): 710-737

Grant, R.M. and C. Baden-Fuller (2004). A knowledge accessing theory of strategic alliances, Journal of Management Studies, 41(1), pp. 61-84.

Hillman, A. J., & Dalziel, T.( 2003) Boards of directors and firm performance: Integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 28: 383-396.

Hirsch, P. M. (1972). Processing fads and fashions: An organization-set analysis of cultural industry systems. American journal of sociology, 77(4), 639-659.

Kecskemeti, P. (1970). The problem of generations- Karl Mannheim. Psychoanalytic Review, 57(3), 378-405.

Kidd, J. (2011). Enacting engagement online: framing social media use for the museum. Information Technology & People 24 (1), 64-77.

Leask, A., Fyall, A., & Barron, P. (2013). Generation Y: Opportunity or challenge – strategies to engage Generation Y in the UK attractions’ sector. Current Issues in Tourism, 16(1), 17-46.

Lindic, J., & Silva, C. M. da. (2011). Value proposition as a catalyst for a customer focused innovation. Management Decision, 49(10), 1694-1708.

Macdonald, S. (2007). Interconnecting: museum visiting and exhibition design. CoDesign,3 (1), 149-162.

Margretta, J. (2002). Why business models matter. Harvard Business Review, 1, 3-8.

McCarthy, K. F., & Jinnett, K. J. (2001). A new framework for building participation in the arts. Rand Corporation.

Mora, E. (2006). Collective production of creativity in the Italian fashion system. Poetics, 34, 334-353.

Musea aantal totaal [Dataset]. (2016, 03 mei). Geraadpleegd van http://erfgoedmonitor.nl/indicatoren/musea-aantal-totaal

Noble, S.M., Hayktko, D.L., & Philips, J. (2009). What drives college-age Generation Y consumers. Journal of Business Research,62, 617-628.

OCW. (2012). Cultuur in beeld 2012. Geraadpleegd van Cultuur in Beeld 2012 link: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/nieuws/2012/10/22/feiten-en-cijfers-over-denederlandse- cultuursector.html

O’Hare, M. (2008) Arts policy research for the next 25 years: a Trajectory after Patrons Despite Themselves, Journal of Cultural Economics, Volume 32, Number 4, 281-291.

Osterwalder, A., & Y. Pigneur (2010). Business Model Generation: a handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley & Son.

Payne, A., & Frow, P. (2005). A strategic framework for customer relationship management. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 167-176.

Peltoniemi, M. (2015), Cultural industries: Product–market characteristics, management s challenges and industry dynamics. International Journal of Management Reviews, w 17(1), 41-68.

Peteraf, M.A. (1993) The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal 1(3):179-191

Pine II, J.P. and Gilmore, H.G. (1998) Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard Business Review, July-August: 97-105.

Pine II, J.P. and Gilmore, H.G. (2014) A leader’s guide to innovation in the experience economy. Strategy & Leadership 42(2): 24-29

Pittaway, L., Robertson, M., Munir, K., Denyer, D. and Neely, A. (2004). Networking and innovation: as systametic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management reviews 5 (3), 137-168.

Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (2012). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

Porter, M. E. (2006, April). Strategy for museums. In American Association of Museums Conference, Boston, Massachusetts (Vol. 28).

Porter, M.E., & Kramer, M.R. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business review, 89 (1/2), 62-77.

Prentice, R., Davies, A., & Beeho, A. (1997). Seeking generic motivations for visiting and not visiting museums and like cultural attractions. Museum management and curatorship, 16(1), 45-70.

Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2000). Co-opting customer competence. Harvard Business Review 78(1), pp. 79-81.

Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2003), The new frontier of experience innovation, MIT Sloan Management Review 44 (4), pp. 12-18.

Reinartz, W., Krafft, M. and Hoyer, W.D. (2004). The customer relationship management process: its measurement and impact on performance. Journal of Marketing Research 41(3), 293-305.

Rowley, J., Kupiec-Teahan, B., & Leeming, E. (2007). Customer community and co-creation: A case study. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 25(2), 136-146.

Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., Nicholls, C. M., & Ormston, R. (Eds.). (2013). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. Sage.

Rynes. S. and Gephart, R. (2004) Qualitative research and the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal 47 (4): 454–462.

Schuster, J. M. (1998). Developing a customer value-based theory of the firm. Journal of Cultural Economics, 22(2,3), 127-150. 78

Slater, S. F. (1997). Developing a customer value-based theory of the firm. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(2), 162-167.

Straub, E. T. (2009). Understanding technology adaption: Theory and future directions for informal learning. Review of Educational Researh, 79(2), 625-649.

Stylianou-Lambert, T. (2010) Re-conceptualizing museum audiences: power, activity, responsibility, Visitor Studies 13(2), 130-144.

Swaan Arons, M., Driest, F., & Weed, K. (2014). The Ultimate marketing machine. Harvard Business Review,92 (7-8), 55-63.

Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long range planning, 43(2-3), 172-194.

Tsou, W., Wang, W., & Tzeng, Y. (2006). Applying a multimedia storytelling website in foreign language learning. Computers & Education, 47(1), 17-28.

Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative inquiry, 16(10), 837-851

Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35-67.

Van Gogh Museum. (2014-2017). Strategic Plan. retrieved from https://www.vangoghmuseum.nl/en/about-the-museum/mission-and-strategy

Verhoef, P. C. (2003). Understanding the effect of customer relationship management efforts on customer retention and customer share development. Journal of Marketing, 67(4), 30-45.

Vicente, E., Camarero, C., & Garrido, M. J. (2012). Insights into Innovation in European Museums: The impact of cultural policy and museum characteristics.Public Management Review, 14(5), 649-679

Voss, G. B., Sirdeshmukh, D. & Voss, Z. G.(2008). The Effects of Slack Resources and Environmental Threat on Product Exploration and Exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 51(1), 147-164.

Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 5(2): 171-180.

Wineman, J. D., & Peponis, J. (2010). Constructing spatial meaning spatial affordances in museum design. Environment and Behavior, 42(1), 86-109. 79

Wyman, B., Smith, S., Meyers, D., & Godfrey, M. (2011). Digital storytelling in museums: Observations and best practices. Curator: The museum journal, 54(4), 172-194.

Yin, R. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (4th edition.)Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publishers.

Zwetsloot, J. (2015,23 june). Grootste klap in cultuursector moet nog komen. De Volkskrant. Retrieved from: http://www.volkskrant.nl/economie/grootste-klap-in-cultuursector- moet-nog-komen~a4086239/

7. Appendix

Appendix 1: Introductory letters (communication/ education/ exhibition)

Geachte mevrouw Halbesma,

Momenteel schrijf ik mijn scriptie vanuit de Economie & Bedrijfskunde faculteit van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Het onderzoek valt onder de mastertrack Entrepreneurship and Management in the Creative Industries. Musea verkeren met het uitgebreide aanbod vrijetijdsactiviteiten niet in de makkelijkste positie om bezoekers aan te trekken. Vooral jongeren zijn een relevante maar niet altijd makkelijk groep om te bereiken. Jongeren en de hele museale ervaring verandert. Ik onderzoek hoe het implementeren van een ‘experience’ musea helpt om Generatie Y (millenials) aan te trekken en te behouden als klant. Ik denk dat het belangrijk is voor museum managers om te denken als entrepreneurs, zich aan te passen aan de gedigitaliseerde wereld waar we nu in leven en om de doelen en wensen van de veeleisende generatie Y op te nemen in het museumbezoek.

Met het oog op zaken als innovatie en digitalisering vermoed ik dat het verwerken van een ‘experience’ musea zou kunnen helpen om publieke waarde te creëren bij mijn generatie (Generatie Y). Interviews met experts van de afdelingen communicatie, tentoonstellingen en educatie zullen de data van mijn onderzoek vormen. Op basis van een aantal criteria heb ik musea geselecteerd die de ‘experience’ onder andere opnemen binnen de afdelingen tentoonstellingen, educatie en/of communicatie. Ik wil onderzoeken hoe musea de ultieme ‘experience’ bieden en zou u daar graag over willen interviewen.

Ik zou het enorm op prijs stellen een communicatie expert van het Van Gogh museum te mogen interviewen, vandaar dat ik u benader. Het interview zal tussen 30 en 45 minuten in beslag nemen. Het interview wordt uitgewerkt en u zult mijn scriptie en daarnaast ook nog een korte samenvatting van mijn onderzoek ontvangen. Mijn scriptie kan waardevol voor het Van Gogh museum zijn, aangezien het inzicht kan bieden over de manieren waarop mijn generatie bereikt kan worden. De informatie zal alleen voor dit onderzoek gebruikt worden.

Ik hoor graag of u vanuit het Van Gogh museum in April wilt meewerken aan mijn onderzoek en in de volgende vier weken een afspraak met mij wilt maken om het interview in te plannen. Bij voorbaat hartelijk dank.

Vriendelijke groet,

Isabella van Marle Universiteit van Amsterdam Entrepreneurship and Management

in the Creative Industries 0654723899

Geachte mevrouw Eijkemans,

Momenteel schrijf ik mijn scriptie vanuit de Economie & Bedrijfskunde faculteit van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Het onderzoek valt onder de mastertrack Entrepreneurship and Management in the Creative Industries. Musea verkeren met het uitgebreide aanbod vrijetijdsactiviteiten niet in de makkelijkste positie om bezoekers aan te trekken. Vooral jongeren zijn een relevante maar niet altijd makkelijk groep om te bereiken. Jongeren en de hele museale ervaring verandert. Ik onderzoek hoe het implementeren van een ‘experience’ musea helpt om Generatie Y (jongvolwassenen) aan te trekken en te behouden als klant. Ik denk dat het belangrijk is voor museum managers om te denken als entrepreneurs, zich aan te passen aan de gedigitaliseerde wereld waar we nu in leven en om de doelen en wensen van de veeleisende generatie Y op te nemen in het museumbezoek.

Ik zou het enorm op prijs stellen een educatie expert van de Pont te mogen interviewen, vandaar dat ik u benader. Het interview zal tussen 30 en 45 minuten in beslag nemen. Het interview wordt uitgewerkt en u zult mijn scriptie en daarnaast ook nog een korte samenvatting van mijn onderzoek ontvangen. Mijn scriptie kan waardevol voor de Pont zijn, aangezien het inzicht kan bieden over de manieren waarop mijn generatie bereikt kan worden. De informatie zal alleen voor dit onderzoek gebruikt worden.

Ik hoor graag of u vanuit de Pont in April of de eerste week van mei wilt meewerken aan mijn onderzoek en een afspraak met mij wilt maken om het interview in te plannen. Bij voorbaat hartelijk dank.

Vriendelijke groet,

Isabella van Marle Universiteit van Amsterdam Entrepreneurship and Management

in the Creative Industries 0654723899

Geachte mevrouw Kleiterp,

Momenteelschrijf ik mijn scriptie vanuit de Economie & Bedrijfskunde faculteit van de Universiteit van Amsterdam. Het onderzoek valt onder de mastertrack Entrepreneurship and Management in the Creative Industries. Musea verkeren met het uitgebreide aanbod vrijetijdsactiviteiten niet in de makkelijkste positie om bezoekers aan te trekken. Vooral jongeren zijn een relevante maar niet altijd makkelijk groep om te bereiken. Jongeren en de hele museale ervaring verandert. Ik onderzoek hoe het implementeren van een ‘experience’ musea helpt om Generatie Y (millenials) aan te trekken en te behouden als klant. Ik denk dat het belangrijk is voor museum managers om te denken als entrepreneurs, zich aan te passen aan de gedigitaliseerde wereld waar we nu in leven en om de doelen en wensen van de veeleisende generatie Y op te nemen in het museumbezoek.

Ik zou het enorm op prijs stellen een expert van de afdeling Tentoonstellingen van het Hermitage te mogen interviewen, vandaar dat ik u benader. Het interview zal tussen 30 en 45 minuten in beslag nemen. Het interview wordt uitgewerkt en u zult mijn scriptie en daarnaast ook nog een korte samenvatting van mijn onderzoek ontvangen. Mijn scriptie kan waardevol voor het Hermitage zijn, aangezien het inzicht kan bieden over de manieren waarop mijn generatie bereikt kan worden. De informatie zal alleen voor dit onderzoek gebruikt worden.

Ik hoor graag of u vanuit het Hermitage in April wilt meewerken aan mijn onderzoek en in de volgende vier weken een afspraak met mij wilt maken om het interview in te plannen. Bij voorbaat hartelijk dank.

Vriendelijke groet,

Isabella van Marle

Appendix 2: Approval certificate

Goedkeuringsverklaring Universiteit van Amsterdam Datum:

De informatie uit dit interview wordt alleen gebruikt door de student Isabella van Marle en de lezers Matthijs Leendertse (scriptiebegeleider) en een tweede nakijker om vast te stellen dat het onderzoek daadwerkelijk verricht is.

Handtekening expert museum: Handtekening Isabella van Marle:

Appendix 3: Interview Guide

Transcriptions can be shared by e-mail. Contact details: [email protected]

Appendix 4: Name Experts

Bakker, Matthijs Brakenhoff, Koen Delabije, Frederique Dorst van, Frederike Gerritsen, Nikita Halbesma, Milou Hofstede ter,Ellen Jacob, Cathy Keulen van, Ernst Kleiterp, Marlies Leek, John Meynen, Marjolijn Tibosch, Herman Smrkovsky, Karin

Appendix 5: Network views

Appendix 6: Code list

Code-Filter: All ______

HU: ALL DATAhpr7 File: [H:\ALL DATAhpr7.hpr7] Edited by: Super Date/Time: 2016-06-23 11:40:24 ______

“Eye Openers” 2q 65+ a het is echt de locatie. Abso.. academies accesible active activities aesthetics after visit ambassador ambience appreciation apps arouse art art centrality art sort-identity ARTtube attention attract audience audience diversity audience reach audience-behaviour audience-centrality audience-demographics audience-identity audience-match audience-segmentation audio tour audio visual augmented reality authenticity award balance benefits Blendle blog BoijmansTV BRAND brand awareness bruikleenverkeer budget building business buttons campaign challenge CHANNEL channel-external 90

channel-own character CH-communication CH-distribution children CH-sales cjp CMD collaborations Collectiegebouw collection collective commercial commit communities concept concert connected connection Constructivism constructivistisch leren content content planning contest convenience craving CR-co creation creative industry creatives CRM CR-networks CR-networks-extern CR-networks-new CR-networks-offline CR-networks-online CR-networks-own cross fertilization culture customer journey CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP data analysis deepening deficiency depot design Design Thinking Methode design-color designer design-products development dialogue different vision digital discount diversity donators drawing campaign dynamic education eldery e-mail emotions En als je dan zo’n tentoonstel.. 91

En dat is niet zozeer omdat we.. en Mickey is inderdaad een wat.. En we hebben ook de tentoonste.. endorser entrance evaluation events exclusion exhibition exhibition-products expensive experience experience economy explainers exploring Exposed exposure extensions external parties Eye Beacons Facebook facilitate fairy tale fashion festivals film financial resources Flicker flitsrondleidingen FOAM als product, als tastbaar.. FOAMLAB FOAM-magazine free Free Choice Learning. friends fun function funds future plans game industrie games Gen Y glamcult goals google + guided tour hacketons HUH humor ideas identity ik ben zelf hoofd van de afdel.. Ik denk wel dat we... educatie.. image improve in progress inclusion individuals influence influencers informal learning information overload innovation 92

inspiration instagram interactivity intern international internet internet of things investment involvement Ja wij willen gewoon het museu.. Ja, maar we willen nadrukkelij.. knowledge knowledge-transfer KunstpodiumT Kunstspot lack language Learning Centre lectures leisure activity Life Long Learning light limitations limited space-issue Linked in Linked Open Data live live tour Living Labs location Lowlands magazine marketing master talks Maurits& media Media Future Week memory millenials mission mobile modern-hip multi media multi media tour municipality museum museum association museum philosophy museum shop museum week museumhacking museumjaarkaart museumnacht music mystery guest national nature negative new audience new campaign new designer new media new-knowledge 93

newsletter not digital not GEN Y objects obligatory offline omni channel online online museum open minded opinion opportunities Park partners passive pay modul peer to peer periscope personal development photography physical product picture Pinterest plans podcast pop up museum positioning poster pre visit preferences presentation preserve press price priority products programming project public publicity public-knowledge Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q4a Q4b Q4c Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 recognizable restaurant return Rijksextra Rijksstudio Rijksstudio Award 94

sales-extern sales-offline scents School of Arts Seeing Sounds selection server behaviour sharing Simpele vraagstukken, kaartje?.. smart city snapchat social social binding agent social media society solution sound sound cloud space stakeholders status Stedelijk X story telling strategic strategic medium struggle students subsidy success surreal symposium talent issue target audience technology temporarily tension art commerce text ticket sales tools touch points tourists traditional traditional media training tv twitter unique User Centre Design principe user friendly value VALUE PROPOSITION Verder probeer je gewoon filmp.. video virtual vis visible vision visitorsdispersion visual culture vivid vloggers VP-design VP-education 95

VP-entertainment VP-newness/innovation VP-participation VP-personalization-customization webshop website whatsapp wikis WOM workshops youn creators young young artists young professionals Young stedelijk young talent young-vision YouTube

Appendix 7 Code hierarchy Codes hierarchy Code-Filter: All ______

HU: ALL DATAhpr7 File: [H:\ALL DATAhpr7.hpr7] Edited by: Super Date/Time: 2016-06-23 11:42:08 ______

“Eye Openers” Root

2q Root

65+ Root not GEN Y 65+ a het is echt de locatie. Abso.. Root academies Root accesible Root active Root experience economy active Gen Y active not GEN Y Gen Y activities Root aesthetics Root after visit Root experience after visit ambassador Root ambience Root experience ambience appreciation Root 96

apps Root Q5 apps Q12 apps VP-participation apps events VP-participation master talks events museum week events museumnacht events VALUE PROPOSITION VP-participation VP-design VALUE PROPOSITION VP-education VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-education VP-entertainment VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-entertainment VP-newness/innovation VALUE PROPOSITION VP-personalization-customization VALUE PROPOSITION arouse Root art Root art centrality Root art sort-identity Root

ARTtube Root channel-external ARTtube attention Root attract Root audience Root audience diversity Root audience reach Root audience-behaviour Root audience-centrality Root audience-demographics Root audience-identity Root audience-match Root audience-segmentation Root audio tour Root audio visual Root augmented reality Root authenticity Root award Root

balance Root benefits Root

Blendle Root channel-external Blendle blog Root

BoijmansTV Root

BRAND Root identity BRAND brand awareness Root bruikleenverkeer Root budget Root building Root business Root buttons Root campaign Root challenge Root Q2 challenge

CHANNEL Root channel-external CHANNEL CH-communication CHANNEL CH-distribution CHANNEL social media CH-distribution Facebook social media Q12 social media CH-sales CHANNEL experience economy CHANNEL channel-external Root channel-own Root character Root

CH-communication Root

CH-distribution Root social media CH-distribution Facebook social media Q12 social media children Root not GEN Y children

CH-sales Root cjp Root

CMD Root CH-communication CMD collaborations Root

Collectiegebouw Root innovation Collectiegebouw collection Root collective Root commercial Root commit Root communities Root concept Root concert Root connected Root connection Root

Constructivism Root constructivistisch leren Root content Root content planning Root contest Root convenience Root craving Root

CR-co creation Root Gen Y CR-co creation not GEN Y Gen Y VP-participation CR-co creation events VP-participation master talks events museum week events museumnacht events VALUE PROPOSITION VP-participation VP-design VALUE PROPOSITION VP-education VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-education VP-entertainment VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-entertainment VP-newness/innovation VALUE PROPOSITION VP-personalization-customization VALUE PROPOSITION creative industry Root creatives Root

CRM Root CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CRM CR-co creation CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP Gen Y CR-co creation not GEN Y Gen Y VP-participation CR-co creation events VP-participation master talks events museum week events museumnacht events VALUE PROPOSITION VP-participation VP-design VALUE PROPOSITION VP-education VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-education VP-entertainment VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-entertainment VP-newness/innovation VALUE PROPOSITION VP-personalization-customization VALUE PROPOSITION CR-networks CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CR-networks-extern CR-networks CR-networks-new CR-networks CR-networks-offline CR-networks CR-networks-online CR-networks CR-networks-own CR-networks experience economy CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP

CR-networks Root CR-networks-extern CR-networks CR-networks-new CR-networks CR-networks-offline CR-networks CR-networks-online CR-networks CR-networks-own CR-networks

CR-networks-extern Root

CR-networks-new Root

CR-networks-offline Root

CR-networks-online Root

CR-networks-own Root cross fertilization Root culture Root customer journey Root

CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP Root CR-co creation CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP Gen Y CR-co creation not GEN Y Gen Y VP-participation CR-co creation events VP-participation master talks events museum week events museumnacht events VALUE PROPOSITION VP-participation VP-design VALUE PROPOSITION VP-education VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-education 100

VP-entertainment VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-entertainment VP-newness/innovation VALUE PROPOSITION VP-personalization-customization VALUE PROPOSITION CR-networks CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CR-networks-extern CR-networks CR-networks-new CR-networks CR-networks-offline CR-networks CR-networks-online CR-networks CR-networks-own CR-networks experience economy CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP data analysis Root deepening Root deficiency Root depot Root design Root

Design Thinking Methode Root design-color Root VP-design design-color designer Root design-products Root development Root dialogue Root different vision Root digital Root discount Root diversity Root donators Root drawing campaign Root dynamic Root education Root eldery Root not GEN Y eldery e-mail Root emotions Root

En als je dan zo’n tentoonstel.. Root

En dat is niet zozeer omdat we.. Root 101

en Mickey is inderdaad een wat.. Root

En we hebben ook de tentoonste.. Root endorser Root CR-networks-extern endorser entrance Root evaluation Root events Root master talks events museum week events museumnacht events exclusion Root inclusion exclusion exhibition Root exhibition-products Root expensive Root experience Root experience economy Root explainers Root exploring Root

Exposed Root exposure Root extensions Root external parties Root

Eye Beacons Root

Facebook Root facilitate Root fairy tale Root fashion Root festivals Root film Root financial resources Root

Flicker Root social media Flicker

102

Facebook social media Q12 social media flitsrondleidingen Root

FOAM als product, als tastbaar.. Root

FOAMLAB Root

FOAM-magazine Root free Root

Free Choice Learning. Root friends Root fun Root function Root funds Root future plans Root game industrie Root games Root VP-participation games events VP-participation master talks events museum week events museumnacht events VALUE PROPOSITION VP-participation VP-design VALUE PROPOSITION VP-education VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-education VP-entertainment VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-entertainment VP-newness/innovation VALUE PROPOSITION VP-personalization-customization VALUE PROPOSITION

Gen Y Root not GEN Y Gen Y glamcult Root goals Root google + Root guided tour Root hacketons Root

HUH Root humor Root ideas Root

103

identity Root ik ben zelf hoofd van de afdel.. Root

Ik denk wel dat we... educatie.. Root image Root improve Root in progress Root inclusion Root individuals Root influence Root influencers Root informal learning Root information overload Root innovation Root inspiration Root Q4c inspiration instagram Root social media instagram Facebook social media Q12 social media interactivity Root CR-co creation interactivity Gen Y CR-co creation not GEN Y Gen Y VP-participation CR-co creation events VP-participation master talks events museum week events museumnacht events VALUE PROPOSITION VP-participation VP-design VALUE PROPOSITION VP-education VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-education VP-entertainment VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-entertainment VP-newness/innovation VALUE PROPOSITION VP-personalization-customization VALUE PROPOSITION Gen Y interactivity intern Root international Root internet Root internet of things Root

104

investment Root involvement Root

Ja wij willen gewoon het museu.. Root

Ja, maar we willen nadrukkelij.. Root knowledge Root knowledge-transfer Root

KunstpodiumT Root

Kunstspot Root lack Root language Root

Learning Centre Root lectures Root leisure activity Root

Life Long Learning Root light Root limitations Root limited space-issue Root

Linked in Root social media Linked in Facebook social media Q12 social media

Linked Open Data Root live Root live tour Root

Living Labs Root location Root

Lowlands Root magazine Root marketing Root commercial marketing master talks Root

Maurits& Root

105

media Root

Media Future Week Root memory Root millenials Root mission Root mobile Root modern-hip Root multi media Root media multi media multi media tour Root media multi media tour municipality Root museum Root museum association Root CR-networks museum association CR-networks-extern CR-networks CR-networks-new CR-networks CR-networks-offline CR-networks CR-networks-online CR-networks CR-networks-own CR-networks museum philosophy Root museum shop Root CH-sales museum shop museum week Root museumhacking Root museumjaarkaart Root museumnacht Root music Root experience music mystery guest Root national Root nature Root negative Root new audience Root new campaign Root new designer Root 106

new media Root new-knowledge Root newsletter Root not digital Root not GEN Y Root objects Root obligatory Root offline Root omni channel Root online Root online museum Root open minded Root opinion Root opportunities Root

Park Root partners Root CR-networks partners CR-networks-extern CR-networks CR-networks-new CR-networks CR-networks-offline CR-networks CR-networks-online CR-networks CR-networks-own CR-networks passive Root pay modul Root peer to peer Root periscope Root personal development Root photography Root physical product Root picture Root

Pinterest Root social media Pinterest Facebook social media Q12 social media

107

plans Root podcast Root pop up museum Root positioning Root poster Root pre visit Root experience pre visit preferences Root presentation Root preserve Root press Root price Root priority Root products Root programming Root project Root public Root publicity Root public-knowledge Root public public-knowledge

Q1 Root

Q2 Root

Q3 Root

Q4 Root

Q4a Root

Q4b Root

Q4c Root

Q5 Root

Q6 Root

Q7 Root

Q8 Root

108

Q9 Root

Q10 Root

Q11 Root

Q12 Root

Q13 Root recognizable Root restaurant Root Q12 restaurant return Root

Rijksextra Root

Rijksstudio Root

Rijksstudio Award Root sales-extern Root CH-sales sales-extern Q13 sales-extern sales-offline Root Q13 sales-offline scents Root

School of Arts Root

Seeing Sounds Root selection Root server behaviour Root sharing Root

Simpele vraagstukken, kaartje?.. Root smart city Root snapchat Root social media snapchat Facebook social media Q12 social media social Root social binding agent Root social media Root Facebook social media Q12 social media society Root

109

solution Root sound Root sound cloud Root space Root stakeholders Root status Root

Stedelijk X Root story telling Root strategic Root strategic medium Root struggle Root challenge struggle Q2 challenge students Root subsidy Root success Root surreal Root symposium Root events symposium master talks events museum week events museumnacht events talent issue Root target audience Root technology Root temporarily Root tension art commerce Root text Root ticket sales Root CH-sales ticket sales tools Root touch points Root experience touch points tourists Root

110

traditional Root traditional media Root media traditional media social media traditional media Facebook social media Q12 social media training Root tv Root twitter Root social media twitter Facebook social media Q12 social media unique Root

User Centre Design principe Root user friendly Root value Root

VALUE PROPOSITION Root VP-design VALUE PROPOSITION VP-education VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-education VP-entertainment VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-entertainment VP-newness/innovation VALUE PROPOSITION VP-personalization-customization VALUE PROPOSITION

Verder probeer je gewoon filmp.. Root video Root CH-communication video virtual Root vis Root visible Root aesthetics visible vision Root visitorsdispersion Root visual culture Root vivid Root vloggers Root media vloggers

VP-design Root

VP-education Root 111

informal learning VP-education

VP-entertainment Root informal learning VP-entertainment

VP-newness/innovation Root

VP-participation Root events VP-participation master talks events museum week events museumnacht events VALUE PROPOSITION VP-participation VP-design VALUE PROPOSITION VP-education VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-education VP-entertainment VALUE PROPOSITION informal learning VP-entertainment VP-newness/innovation VALUE PROPOSITION VP-personalization-customization VALUE PROPOSITION

VP-personalization-customization Root webshop Root website Root CH-distribution website social media CH-distribution Facebook social media Q12 social media whatsapp Root wikis Root CH-communication wikis

WOM Root workshops Root events workshops master talks events museum week events museumnacht events youn creators Root young Root young artists Root young professionals Root

Young stedelijk Root young talent Root young-vision Root

YouTube Root

112