University of Southern Denmark

Our museum Studying museum communication for citizen engagement Drotner, Kirsten

Published in: Nordisk Museologi

Publication date: 2017

Document version: Final published version

Citation for pulished version (APA): Drotner, K. (2017). Our museum: Studying museum communication for citizen engagement. Nordisk Museologi, (2), 148-55.

Go to publication entry in University of Southern Denmark's Research Portal

Terms of use This work is brought to you by the University of Southern Denmark. Unless otherwise specified it has been shared according to the terms for self-archiving. If no other license is stated, these terms apply:

• You may download this work for personal use only. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying this open access version If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details and we will investigate your claim. Please direct all enquiries to [email protected]

Download date: 30. Sep. 2021 Projektpresentation • Nordisk Museologi 2017 • 2, s. 148–155

Our Museum Studying museum communication for citizen engagement

Kirsten Drotner

Abstract: Our Museum was initiated in 2016. It is a five-year Danish national research and development programme comprising seven university departments at five universities and eight museum partners. The project aims to facilitate new forms of citizen engagement and inclusion by developing and studying how museums communicate with audiences in innovative ways. In this text the background, aims, hypothesis and organization are presented.

Keywords: Museum communication, citizen engagement, collaboratory research between university and museums.

Museums have always interacted with the world Museums’ own research priorities are still chiefly around them. Yet, it seems as if the scale and related to the substance of collections – be they scope of interaction has increased in the past art history or astronomy, archaeology, biology two decades. The almost universal presence or history. An interest in audiences is chiefly of museums online is an indication of this expressed in surveys on visitor throughput, development: an expansion of user-focused marketing efficacy or simple analytics of the museum communication that is often policy-led number of online clicks. A similar situation is and the visibility of museums in environments seen in museology departments and programs beyond the museum walls. The number of at universities. While museology and heritage museums have doubled worldwide 1992–2012 studies have become established features of (Temples 2013), and the new institutions are many universities, they develop remarkably often heralded as beacons of tourism and as little sustained research on the ways in which levers of local and regional cultural economies actual and potential audiences communicate (Falk & Sheppard 2006). Not least private with museums. Visitor studies remain the funding goes into the establishment of the new key inroad to theory-based studies of actual museums and into a transformation of existing museum-goers whether it adheres to the museum sites and settings. All these trends put traditional socio-cognitive approach (Bitgood increasing emphasis on fostering new relations & Shettel 1996, Falk & Dierking 2000, 2013) to actual and potential museum audiences. or to more recent trends focusing on visitors’ However, while museums’ interaction and meaning-making and learning practices communication practices with audiences (Hooper-Greenhill 2006, Bounia et al. 2012, gain in importance, the same cannot be said Dodd 2012, Pierroux & Ludvigsen 2013). for systematic research on these practices. Museums’ introduction of digital tools online Our Museum

and onsite has sparked research on usage of experience, learning outcomes or the use of 149 these tools, but both museums and universities digital technologies – all of which are often at the primarily study the “digital turn” from a technology- core of innovative communication practices? led perspective, for example the application of This is because we want to hold on to the iPads or the use of blogs (Cameron & Kenderdine fact that public museums are key catalysts in 2010, Runnel & Pruulmann-Vengerfeldt 2014). generating a society’s understanding of itself, In a Nordic context, two Danish surveys on both past and present. Museums are resources universities’ museum research document that for people’s abilities to act in the world, and museum communication is now increasingly on the world, because museums offer people taken up, but mostly on a short-term basis, scripts to relate to the wider world. Still, as conducted by master or PhD students with is well known, not all groups harness these individual museums and with little aggregate democratic museum resources, and not all knowledge formation or sustained research museums understand what it takes to involve development as a result (Villadsen & Drotner new audience groups. To focus on museums’ 2011, Gransgaard et al. 2014). citizen engagement offers a unique pathway In other words, there currently exists to understand museums’ interaction with the a gap between considerable economic, wider world and, in more concrete ways, to political and practical developments in develop evidence-based tools for advancing museum communication and research-based such interactions in democratic societies. Our knowledge on these processes/progresses. This Museum’s overall aim, then, is to help advance gap means that museum communication and widen citizen engagement through remains under-theorised, the societal impact theory-driven empirical designs and studies of communication practices and projects of museum communication whose results remains under-documented, and innovation have transfer value beyond the research and of museum communication remains too little development programme. based on systematic evidence. Other studies, also in the Nordic countries of Europe, have focused on museums’ role for democratic participation and citizen Why focus on citizen engagement? engagement (Stuedahl 2011, Sattrup & Taking note of this gap between practice and Christensen 2013, Runnel & Pruulmann- research in museum communication, Our Vengerfeldt 2014). Similar aspects have been Museum was initiated in 2016. It is a five-year addressed by networks such as the Nordic national research and development programme Research Network on Learning Across comprising seven university departments at five Contexts, directed by professor Ola Erstad at Danish universities and eight Danish museum the University of Oslo (2011–14); by Culture partners. The total budget is c. 6 million EUR. Kick (2011–14), directed by professor Dagny We aim to facilitate new forms of citizen Stuedahl, Norwegian University of Life engagement and inclusion by developing and Sciences, and by the ongoing Cultural Heritage studying how museums communicate with Mediascapes, directed by professor Palmyre audiences in innovative ways. Pierroux at the University of Oslo. Our Why focus on advancing citizen engagement Museum helps advance these efforts in three and inclusion and not, for example, personalised capacities: we add a historical perspective, a Kirsten Drotner

150 design perspective and a systematic evaluation selected to cover important nodes in this perspective. development and to cover the diversity of communication modes. For example, one project on antiquarianism illuminates pre- What we do modern practices of communication and International museum studies largely under- interaction, while another project hones in on stand museums’ interaction with their open air museums and their performance of surroundings through a historical master living history. narrative that takes us from an emphasis Eight projects study key areas of contem- on citizen enlightenment, public education porary museum communication. The projects and betterment of the unruly masses in the are selected based on an inclusive definition early days of museum development on to a of what a museum is, since we surmise that situation today when individual experience such an approach best traces varieties in and consumer enrichment is at the core of communication practices and organisational museum communication (Hooper-Greenhill frameworks. So, art, natural and cultural 1992, Bennett 1995, Anderson 2004). While history museums are partner museums as well this trajectory may be correct on a discursive as a planetarium. Also, projects are selected level, we want to explore museum practices, from around the country and including small and we want to go beyond national museums as well as very large institutions. In this way, and similar icons that are often referenced as we are able to document institutional as well documentation in the master narratives. as substantive similarities and differences. Our thesis is that museums’ communication In empirical terms, the projects follow a practices, both past and present, are marked joint research ecology: from (co-)designing by balancing enlightenment and experience new communication initiatives, through as constant dimensions to be handled, rather documentation of their implementation, and than as elements to abandon or strive for. on to evaluating the results of these initiatives. To this effect, our key research questions are Many, but not all, projects involve the use as follows: Which dilemmas in handling of digital modes of communication such as dimensions of enlightenment and experience augmented reality installations and smart do we see in Danish museum communication phones. Since we are keen to understand in the past and today? And on that basis: How how museums practice communication as a can museums’ communication with audiences lever of citizen engagement, our focus is not be designed, developed and evaluated so as to on technological innovation as such, nor is widen and advance museums’ means of citizen it on museum communication as a form of engagement? marketing or branding. Based on these research questions, our research design encompasses a historical Who is involved and a contemporary strand of research. Five projects study the history of Danish museum Our Museum is funded by two Danish philan- communication, adding depth and richness thropic foundations, the Nordea-fonden and to existing histories (Floris & Vasström 1999, the Velux Fonden, along with the universities Larsen & Ingemann 2005). The projects are involved. Partner museums contribute with Our Museum

in-kind funding, which means that museum by a group of senior scholars engaged with 151 professionals grant time to the programme. the Danish Centre on Museum Studies, the Both foundations are major donators to substance of the Our Museum programme Danish museums, with the Velux Fonden also has been developed jointly by the university funding research-based collaboration, while and museum partners involved. The cases the Nordea-fonden supports cultural research we study in the 13 projects are located and for the first time with its grant to Our Museum. explored within particular museums. In the Interestingly, the foundation notes that it is time contemporary projects, cases are selected by to help advance research-based evidence about partner museums, while research questions and museum communication, so that foundations theoretical and methodological approaches are may spend their money more wisely. From drafted by university partners. a university perspective, the Our Museum Each project involves a senior researcher initiative is unique, since it is a researcher- and a junior researcher – 11 PhD students and driven programme organised by the arts and two postdocs in all and 13 senior scholars. For humanities and across regional boundaries at the eight contemporary projects, a collaborator a time, when Danish research policy invites for each partner museum is also part of the competition between universities, rather than project team. Here, junior researchers spend collaboration, just as it prioritises strategic part time at the partner museum and part time research within the STEM (Science, Technology, at the university where they are appointed. Engineering and Mathematics) areas. This project organisation facilitates knowledge In addition to its 13 funded projects, Our development and knowledge exchange on a Museum involves a number of associated day-to-day basis. projects conducted by one or more project An executive board of four is an aid to the partners. Taken together, about 40 people programme director in strategic programme collaborate in the programme, making us be development. The vice-director is chosen in a position to reach beyond the short-term among the two museum members so as to and individual projects that have characterised balance the programme director’s university Danish research and development studies on affiliation. A coordinator manages the museum communication so far. Participants programme and is also key to implementing come from a range of professional backgrounds, the programme’s communication strategy. from astrophysics and biology to education, Naturally, a programme on museum art history, museology, history, performance audiences’ engagements should practice studies, media and communication science modes of communication that further such and ICT studies. This diversity is in tune with engagements in addition to producing our inclusive definition of museums, and with traditional academic output. As a modest the demands made to study the complexities of beginning, all participants have been on a museum communication in a historical as well training course in video production so that as a contemporary perspective. we are able to communicate with a wider public during the course of the programme. Such process communication is important How do we collaborate not least for local community involvement at Based on an overall research objective identified our partner museums. Kirsten Drotner

152 While the empirical basis of Our Museum perspectives at our themed seminars (see is a national one, the wider context of the below) and be mindful of the dynamic nature programme is, of course, of international even of our key concepts enlightenment and relevance. We therefore have an international experience. How empirical findings can be scientific advisory board which advises on integrated across the two strands remains to be programme organisation and development seen, as none of the projects have progressed and offers critique where needed. that far. Programme progression is optimised by having all projects contribute to overall Programme challenges – and how programme milestones in terms of, for to handle them example, popular communication. Moreover, A research and development programme of each project has defined milestones in terms this size faces a number of challenges in terms of substance and impact. Many participants of cohesion, progression and synergy. Key at Our Museum have considerable experience among these challenges is how to avoid 13 with, for example, EU funding where projects developing their own research agendas milestone demands are very detailed leaving and focus points with the result that overall little room for substantive modification and programme cohesion is lost. We have handled innovation. Based on these experiences, we this challenge by having all partners agree have identified fewer milestones and they are to the programme’s key research questions chiefly of a substantive nature. In addition, prior to receiving funding. While these senior researchers of each project organise questions remain very general, we have also regular project meetings addressing issues of identified joint analytical dimensions that all organisation and tackling possible obstacles projects address: an organisational dimension to planned developments. The programme (how do different types of museums handle director also makes visits to all museums to dilemmas of enlightenment and experience?); discuss work processes and organisation. a representation dimension (what is the It is well known that overall programme substantive focus of audience communication synergy is the most decisive part of successful in terms of balancing aspects of enlightenment research and development processes, and and experience?); and a reception dimension often also the most difficult to obtain. Our (who are included and excluded by particular museum is home to different organisations communication practices?). Still, Our Museum and different disciplines, both of which pose faces a dilemma of cohesion in terms of particular challenges in shaping and sustaining optimising insights gained in the historical programme synergy. In terms of organisation, and contemporary strands of research. Ideally, museums and universities are very different the historical projects would be conducted professional cultures, even when working in prior to the contemporary projects, so that the similar fields. Canadian museologist Élise historical insights on balancing dimensions Dubuc notes how “museology studies become of enlightenment and experience would feed detached from the museum as institution” into the design of contemporary projects. so that the gap has widened between the In practical terms, this is not feasible. So, we two professional cultures (Dubuc 2011:500). try to alternate historical and contemporary Our museum is one among many recent Our Museum

attempts to forge new professional alliances in the term is defined and understood very 153 museology across museums and universities. differently by the two traditions. So, during Time is key to developing organisational our seminar key terms are taken up, unpacked, synergies in such alliances, since museums discussed and exemplified to qualify overall often operate within stricter time-frames than programme synergy. In more mundane ways, do universities. A PhD student may want we seek to advance synergy by having our to convey research results when his or her partner institutions host programme seminars. research process is almost complete for fear In this way, all participants get a sense of that not everything is covered and controlled ownership and they come to better understand prior to that. A museum, on the other hand, organisational and substantive differences. may find it useful that the PhD student shares also small insights and do so early on, for Implications example insights culled from a focus-group interview or an intervention with a group of In organisational terms, Our Museum is a non-users. Based on previous experiences laboratory of collaboration facing differences with directing collaboration across museums in terms of institution, knowledge formation, and universities, Our Museum regularly discipline and generation. Our experience so far hosts knowledge-sharing sessions from our is that these differences are not only obstacles various projects at our partner museums. Such of collaboration, they are also options. This is sessions have the added value of illuminating because the programme has sufficient time to the museum’s project involvement to the build a community of trust allowing learning entire organisation and perhaps the local trajectories to be explored within and across community, thus operating as a pathway to the interdisciplinary partnerships. As such, wider knowledge exchange. Our Museum can help strengthen the basis In terms of discipline, Our Museum is host for new networks and modes of collaboration to a very wide range of fields, approaches and across such differences. practices. Museums and universities exercise In substantive terms, a key to programme different knowledge formations and priorities success is the quality of insights gained during of knowledge exchange. But equally important the programme. It is our hope that our results is to take note of different disciplinary can demonstrate the validity of researching approaches to what are seemingly identical museum communication as a lever to advance issues and themes. It is adamant to form a joint and widen citizen engagement. Such results knowledge base across these diversities while may act as pathways to increased recognition harnessing participants’ respective resources. of audience communication as a valid and Again, time is of the essence. During the first two important research area on a par with established years of the programme, all participants meet disciplines of research in museums as well as very regularly for one- or two-day seminars. universities. Moreover, it is our ambition to The seminars focus on particular themes based deliver examples of best practice that other on input from participants, and they form the cultural institutions can apply, thus widening heartbeat of the programme. For example, their relevance for new groups of audiences. museology and media and communication Last but not least, increased knowledge studies both apply the term “audience”. But about ways in which museums interact with Kirsten Drotner

154 the world around them is a unique option for Museums and Other Cultural Institutions. Oxford: institutions to challenge their own identities Altamira Press. and rationale of existence. This is because such Floris, Lene & Annette Vasström 1999. På museum. interactions invite museums to see themselves Mellem oplysning og oplevelse. Roskilde: Roskilde from the outside, to critically examine what is University Press. often taken for granted, and hence invigorate Gransgaard, Helle, Jens F. Jensen & Ane H. Larsen museums’ societal impact for the future. 2014. Dansk museumsforskning. Status og tendenser 2013 [Danish museum research. Status and trends]. Aalborg: Aalborg University Press. Literature Hooper-Greenhill, Eilean 1992. Museums and the Anderson, Gail (ed.) 2004. Reinventing the Museum. Shaping of Knowledge. London: Routledge. Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on the Hooper-Greenhill, Eilean 2006. “Studying visitors.” Paradigm Shift. Lanham: Altamira Press. In Sharon Macdonald (ed.). A Companion to Bennett, Tony 1995. The Birth of the Museum. History, Museum Studies. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Theory, Politics. London: Routledge. Sons, 362–376. Bitgood, Stephen & Harris H. Shettel 1996. “An Larsen, Ane H. & Bruno Ingemann (eds.) overview of visitor studies.” Journal of Museum 2005. Ny dansk museologi. Aarhus: Aarhus Education 21:3, 6–10. Universitetsforlag. Bounia, Alexandra et al. 2012. Voices from the Pierroux, Palmyre & Sten Ludvigsen 2013. Museum. Qualitative Research Conducted in “Communication interrupted. Textual practices Europe’s National Museums. Linköping: Linköping and digital interactives in art museums.” In University Press. Kirsten Drotner & Kim C. Schrøder (eds.). The Cameron, Fiona & Sarah Kenderdine 2010. Theorizing Connected Museum. Social Media and Museum Digital Cultural Heritage. A Critical Discourse. Communication. London: Routledge, 153–176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Runnel, Pille & Pille Pruulmann-Vengerfeldt (eds.) Dodd, Jocelyn et al. 2012. Voices from the Museum. 2014. Democratising the Museum. Reflections on Survey Research in Europe’s National Museums. Participatory Technologies. New York, Berlin: Linköping: Linköping University Press. Peter Lang. Dubuc, Élise 2011. “Museum and university Sattrup, Lise & Julie L. Christensen 2013 “Museums mutations. The relationship between museum as spaces for cultural citizenship. An example practices and museum studies in the era on how museums and cultural institutions in of interdisciplinarity, professionalisation, Denmark examine their role as spaces for cultural globalisation and new technologies.” Museum citizenship.” The International Journal of the Management and Curatorship 26:5, 497–508. Inclusive Museum 6, 31–41. Falk, John H. & Lynne Dierking 2000. Learning from Stuedahl, Dagny 2011. “Social media and community Museums. Visitor Experience and the Making of involvements in museums. A case study of a local Meaning. Plymoth: Altamira Press. history wiki community.” Nordisk Museologi 1, 3–14. Falk, John H. & Lynne Dierking 2013. The Museum “Temples of delight.” The Economist, 21 December 2013. Experience Revisited. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Villadsen, Rikke & Kirsten Drotner 2011. Dansk Coast Press. museumsforskning. Status og tendenser [Danish Falk, John H. & Beverly K. Sheppard 2006. Thriving museum research. Status and trends]. Odense: in the Knowledge Age. New Business Models for Danish Centre on Museum Studies. Our Museum

Our Museum – in brief 8) Art, dialogue and experiment: User participation 155 Programme duration: 2016–2020 as a social catalyst for museum communication Total budget: 6 million EUR. 9) Old art and contemporary users: New ways of Website: www.ourmuseum.dk communicating the Skovgaard family’s art and age 10) Astrophysics: Designing exhibitions for inclusion Museum partners 11) Participatory and professional interchange in The Danish Castle Centre digital museum practice The Historical Museum of Northern Jutland 12) The museum as a site for mediating experiences Limfjordsmuseet 13) Rethinking existing participatory practices: Natural History Museum of Denmark Options and obstacles for digital museum RAGNAROCK: The Museum for Pop, Rock and development. Youth Culture Randers Museum of Art Associate projects Skovgaard Museet 14) Join or die! Design Museum Denmark between Tycho Brahe Planetarium communication, practice and co-creation. University of Copenhagen: Dept. of Nordic University partners Studies and Linguistics Roskilde University: Dept. of Communication and Arts 15) The new museum experience: Dimensions of University of Copenhagen: Royal School of Library and public engagement at Louisiana Museum of Information Science; Dept. of Science Education Modern Art, 1958–98. University of Copenhagen: University of Southern Denmark: Dept. of History; Dept. of Arts and Cultural Studies Dept. for the Study of Culture – Media Studies 16) Securing significant cultural heritage values in Aalborg University: Dept. of Communication and local communities: Between conservation and Psychology communication. Aalborg University: Dept. of Aarhus University: School of Communication and Culture and Global Studies Culture. 17) Exploring production criteria for a transmedia exhibition. Aalborg University: Dept. of Projects Communication and Psychology 1) Antiquarianism and private collections before the 18) 3D scanning, modeling and printing in the rise of museums: Transnational networks, mediation museum: The use of 3D technology in current and erudition of Danish antiquarians, 1600–1750 museum communication. Aarhus University: 2) Between centre and periphery: Museum School of Communication and Culture. development, 1850–1950 3) 100 years of living history at Danish museums 4) Generalist or specialist? Developing the museum Kirsten Drotner, professor, dr.phil. profession since 1958 [email protected] 5) Digital museum communication in Denmark: Assessing implementation and impact Department for the Study of Culture Media 6) Experience design og evaluation as means of University of Southern Denmark museum learning Campusvej 55 7) Immersive digital experiences at unguarded DK-5230 Odense M, Denmark exhibition sites