Case Study : When neighbourghood museums share the same mission

Consider the following case.

A is a small museum which, for the past 2 decades or so, has been emphasizing the presentation, collection and preservation of photography.

B is a neighbourhood museum which mission is to collect, preserve, exhibit and interpret outstanding works of art (any type of art). Due to the increasing interest for photography, B recently decided to expand its scope into the 15th art.

In spite of the attempted competition, who could blame B for developing a new marketing strategy? or for seeking new sources of financing?

———————————————————-

In the book Marketing Culture and the Arts (2001), author François Colbert attempts to explain why museums should supplement each other rather than covet each other’s ideas, missions or potential contributors.

According to him, virtually 100% of the population consumes at least one type of cultural product in any given year. The cultural product, in its broadest sense encompasses everything from high art to popular art (CDs, movies, books, theater,… and museums…)

Depending on their social profile, some people are interested by one form of art but not necessary the other. For instance, consumers may choose a museum to attend with friends because it fulfills their social needs more than any other activities.

Now, Colbert’s idea is that museum’s real enemy is not the museum down the street but the other cultural options. Hence, in our case study, Colbert would argue that A and B are attempting to aim the same marketing pool when they should in fact reach a public that would not normally come to museums.

Do you agree with Colbert? Why or why not?