Master’s Thesis
Is auto-renewal a blessing?
The role of Participation in Art Museum Member Retention
Written by: Yakunu van Santen
5618746 Supervisor: Dr. James Slevin
Date: 29.03.2018
Master’s Programme: Communication Science Graduate School of Communication
Abstract
The need for additional funding through donations of private members in the cultural sector has increased as financial support from state subsidies and foundations decreases. Museum membership professionals seek ways to build an active and sustainable membership base. They do so by developing membership programs with exclusive member activities. There is still uncertainty as to whether these efforts increase retention rates. After reviewing the
literature, this study investigates the drives for member retention by presenting the results of a survey (N = 861) carried out among the basic level museum members of a large Dutch art museum, examining factors of motivation, satisfaction, participation and their effects on self-reported retention. It concludes with a section discussing the findings and proposing paths for future research.
Introduction
The need for additional funding through donations of private members in the cultural sector has increased enormously as financial support from state subsidies and foundations decreases (Paswan et al, 2004; Reavey et al, 2013). Since 2011, when the Dutch government announced drastic financial cutbacks for cultural institutions (Zijlstra, 2011), art museums and other cultural institutions in the Netherlands have seen a fast growing number of member groups. These so-called museum Friends groups are formed to develop a loyal audience group that will visit regularly, contribute to fundraising campaigns and sometimes to volunteer. The host institutions aim not only at generating extra income, but also at raising awareness and public support for their development and financial wellbeing. The package of benefits normally reflects these strategic goals with member privileges such as previews, talks, social activities and discounts on food and beverages as well as merchandise (Slater & Armstrong, 2014)
In the arts, membership (or Friendship) is not a new phenomenon. From the 19th century onwards, a plurality of membership circles attached to cultural institutions like heritage sites, art museums and other non-profits have been in existence (Hayes & Slater, 2003). In the past, membership of arts organizations mostly fulfilled a social function for a small élite of benefactors. Over time however, the schemes have evolved into complex multi-level membership programs serving the institution by building a wide base of followers who contribute to the cause (Slater, 2003a). Some organizations, like Tate in the UK, have a massive membership base with numbers up to over 100,000 members, boosted especially by temporary blockbuster exhibitions for which membership provides exclusive benefits like unlimited access and special member viewing hours (Slater, 2010).
Managers are constantly seeking ways to initiate, build up, secure and intensify member relationships (Hayes & Slater, 2003 ; Reavey et al, 2013). For the present study,
membership is referred to as a product consisting of a range of benefits which are sold by the host organization to its members for a fee (Raymond, 1992) and we limit the focus to
memberships schemes of art museums. Member benefits such as free admission, peaks behind the scenes, evening viewings, private events and curator talks, are offered as loyalty programs to cultivate and retain the current member relationships (Mallison, 2016).
The main challenge for management now lies in building long lasting, sustainable bonds, which has proven to be more efficient and less costly than investing in marketing efforts for new member acquisition (Bhattacharya, 1998; Glynn, 1996 ; Slater, 2013, p. 233 ; Reavey et al, 2013). Burns and Sadek (1993), state that triggers for becoming a member are rational, economic and tangible and that individuals will retain their membership thanks to the persistence of its benefits. As a result, the focus of membership teams mainly lies in
sustaining the relationships by building a loyalty program.
In what follows, the effectiveness and necessity of providing these sets of benefits is tested through an online questionnaire distributed among the Friends of a large Dutch art museum. The research is triggered by a concept introduced by Reavey, Howley, & Korschun, D. (2013), who did an exploratory study about the phenomenon of stalled relationships. A stalled relationship is defined by Reavey et al. as a stage in which members maintain a positive psychological affiliation, but discontinue the transactional component of the relationship by not actively renewing (p. 93). In other words: a state in which membership isn’t renewed not as a result of negative experiences but due to other reasons. Reavey demonstrates that, even though the formal (financial) relationship hasn’t been actively renewed, the former members still evaluate their membership experience and their relationship with the museum mainly as positive (p. 93).
In another study, Slater states that lapsing of membership is a complex topic (2013). Reasons for lapsing might stem either from misalignment between initial motivations and
actual experiences, or people might not renew their membership because of flaws in service, or for practical reasons such as age, moving to a different area or time-constraints due to children or busy jobs (Reavey et al., 2013). However, there is also a group for which these reasons don’t cause the transactional tie of the relationship to break as they retain the membership as a means of supporting the organization despite not utilizing the reciprocal benefits (Slater, 2013, p. 238).
Surprisingly, none of the authors that theoretically or empirically researched the topics around museum member retention and reasons for stalling or lapsing, have thoroughly
researched the effect that automatic renewals through direct debit might have on retention rates. Payment through direct debit and automatic renewal has not generally been accepted in the US or the UK, whereas in the Netherlands, this type of contract has been widely accepted for many years. Further review of previous literature reveals that the only author (briefly) pointing out the importance of automatic renewal is Alix Slater in The Routledge Companion to Arts Marketing, stating that “membership can minimize “churn” (lapsing, red.) by getting members to sign up to “direct debit” (O'Reilly, Rentschler & Kirchner, 2013, p. 238). She further mentions that, after members (often with an extra incentive), sign up for payment by direct debit, “inertia takes over as members forget to ask their bank to cancel the regular payment when the renewal arrives” (p. 239). She suggests that it creates a situation in which a member might not even realise he still is and simply forgets about it: a payed stalled
relationship.
These statements call for a further investigation of the topic. Is it true that members with automatically renewed contracts might simply forget about the membership? Do they use the benefits offered through this continuous bond with the art museum? And what does this say about their future intentions and evaluations of the membership? In other words:
RQ 1: Is active participation in membership programs a necessary condition for retention of art museum members with automatically renewed contracts?
To further contextualize and take additional factors into account, other possible indica-tors for member retention proposed by earlier research need to be further analysed. Therefore, a second RQ was formulated:
RQ 2: To what extent do motives and satisfaction play a role in the retention of art museum members?
The present study will contribute to the existing literature in that it is the first time that the effect of auto-renewal on retention rates and future intentions is researched in the field of art museum memberships. In addition, it takes into account the possible direct effects of moti-vations for joining and the role of member participation, as well as the moderating effect of satisfaction on members’ future intentions. It contributes to the retention arts marketing litera-ture and provide art museum membership professionals with guidelines for their fulitera-ture reten-tion strategies.
In what follows, these questions will be placed into a wider theoretical and empirical framework by reviewing the related literature published thus far around cultural memberships and drives and motives for member acquisition and retention. Hypotheses for the survey re-search carried out will be presented.
The subsequent section will report and explain the findings of a survey research car-ried out among the members of a large Dutch Art Museum. The proposed hypotheses will be tested and assessed. The conclusions drawn from the empirical research will be formulated. This paper concludes with a discussion section. Limitations, management implications as well as suggestions for further research will be presented.
Theoretical framework
Motivation as an indicator of retention
A large body of mostly quantitative research has been done to demonstrate the main motivations for individuals who choose to engage in membership relations with cultural insti-tutions. The importance of personal identification with the organization and social identity theory have formed part of the literature concerning member motivations (Ashforth, & Mael, 1989 ; Camarero & José Garrido, 2011 ; Bhattacharya, Rao & Glynn, 1995 ; Glynn, 1996 ; Peasley, Coleman & Royne, 2017), stating that individuals might join to enhance their per-sonal identity and self-esteem by subscribing as a member of a cultural organization
A rough divide into two factors of motivations to join a membership scheme can be proposed: transactional and relational. According to Johnson and Garbarino, transactional motives are based on “discrete buyer-seller exchanges of a commodity or performance for money with minimal personal relationships” (2001, p. 70). At the other end of the continuum, they further state, are relational exchanges, which are “characterized by cooperative actions and mutual adjustment of both parties” (p. 70).
Authors have also argued that membership grants the individual cultural distinction and see membership as a means of enhancing the self by acquiring prestige. (Glynn,
Bhattacharya & Rao, 1996 ; Bhattacharya, 1995 ; Lansley, 1996)These studies also underline the two different motivational drivers for members in that they on the one hand want to
support the organization, but on the other expect something in return in the shape of privilege.
Gumesson (1999) identifies a distinction between commercial (transactional)
membership and genuine (relational) membership. Commercial motives may also be referred to as egoistic reasons for the tangible benefits such as receiving discounts, tax benefits, free merchandise and other exclusive offers (Paswan & Troy, 2004). Bhattacharya further explores
the dimensions of motivation and proposes philanthropy to be one of the key motivators for members to join and stay affiliated to a (cultural) membership program. An empirical study among art museum demonstrated that the primary motivation for members to join a was “supporting the arts” (Bhattacharya, 1998, p. 33).
Burns & Sadek (1992) state that triggers for becoming a member are rational, economic and tangible, suggesting that institutions should focus their acquisition marketing strategies on underlining those needs. They further state that membership loyalty and retention will be pursued based on the more relational grounds meaning that over time, members develop emotional and psychological commitment to the organization.
For the present study we focus on the degree to which motives for joining as a member of an art museum affect future retention. Retention is referred to as the continuation of the member relationship and reported as the degree to which members are willing to maintain their relationship with the organization.
In linking motivational factors with future intentions, previous literature can be re-ferred to. Enduring involvement, for instance, is reported to be positively influenced by moti-vation (Kyle et al, 2006). Personal identification has been proposed as a predictor of member loyalty within the cultural field (Bhattacharya et al., 1995), as well as learning objectives and social bonding in the leisure industry (Kyle et al., 2006). Johnson and Garbarino (2001) stress that consistent subscribers (a stage ‘before’ they turn into members) are more likely to devel-op feeling of trust and commitment toward the organization, making them more prone to do-nate in the future.
The most applicable influences of motivations for the present study however, can be drawn from research carried out by Slater (2010). In her qualitative research carried out in the British art institute Tate, she specifically focusses on involvement, which she sees as an
ante-cedent for but also as an outcome of member relations. She thus ties motivation and loyalty together in one concept (p. 732). She further distinguishes the desire to learn and altruism as motives for joining and as a reason to retain the membership. Involvement may also be mani-fested by individuals seeking the commercial benefits, such as a venue with proximity to work where they can meet with friends, or somewhere with cache, like the members’ Bar at Tate Modern (Slater, 2010).
After evaluating these proposed motivational factors linked to loyalty and retention (transactional/commercial/tangible, philanthropic, learning objectives and social bonds), we have valid reasons to hypothesize the following for the present study:
H1: Motivational factors for joining an art institution relate positively to member retention
Retention through active participation?
Membership schemes differ greatly from each other in terms of programs, size of the member base, the amount of membership levels, prices and the degree of professionalism with which they are run. For this study, we focus on what Hayes and Slater have termed the
Integrated membership program. This type is fully integrated into the museum organization and has its own dedicated staff, or at least a single manager. This type is more common within the larger institutions and represents the “mature” membership program. It typically factors into the museum's annual budget and strategic plan. Stratification of membership levels are more sophisticated among this type, which allows for a wider range of potential members from a more diverse range of social and economic backgrounds (Hayes and Slater, 2003).
The monitoring of member activity levels is vital to predict future intentions (Gar-barino, 1999). Ar study by Slater (2003a) demonstrates the alignment of the benefits people value most in deciding whether to become a member and to continue the membership on one hand, and the actual use of these benefits on the other. She found the correlates to all be
sig-nificant. (p. 199). The tendency of members to visit more frequently than non-members per-haps indicates that they are more involved (Slater & Armstrong, 2010)
Other findings even show that as customers own increasingly committed points of contact, they are prepared to upgrade to a higher level of membership (George, M., & Wakefield, 2018). Complementarily, authors argue that members with higher visiting frequency are less likely to downgrade (Marinova & Singh, 2014).
Kotler and Kotler (1998) formulate 3 gradations of activity (participation) among members. The high actives being the ones to spend the most time, energy and money on the organization; the moderate ones who frequently visit but do not get highly involved; followed by the inactives who participate never to very infrequently but still maintain their
membership. This last group can be referred to as the earlier mentioned stalled members by Reavey et al. (2013), meaning that the membership isn’t active anymore, because the individuals did not actively renew yet are still very fond of the museum.
This directly touches upon the overriding research question of this study. It suggests namely, that active participation in the membership program does not necessarily predict a membership to lapse. For this study, member participation is defined as the frequency with which members visit the museum and attend exclusive member events.
Bhattacharya et al, (1995), in describing predictors for membership lapsing, find that downgrading to a lower level of membership as well as having received the membership as a gift generate a higher probability for the member to lapse. In The Routledge Companion to Atrs Marketing, Slater (2013) states that there are also groups of members that, in spite of losing the opportunity to participate in the membership program due to practical reasons (moving away or ageing), don’t lapse because they still feel attached to the organization and desire to continue their support through yearly donations. Camarero & Garrido (2010) report
similar findings in stating that it is true that loyalty is not always reflected in participation and attendance at the museum.
Holmes, K., & Slater, A. (2012) detect a similar type of member of heritage sites, focussing specifically on volunteers. They identify the ‘substituter’ as a new type of member Participation varies from active engagement such as committee membership or volunteering, to passive involvement, whereby the member pays their fees but remains a silent member. Substituters are defined as “members who are unable to participate actively in an association and so appear to be passive members, although they are still committed to the association” (Holmes & Slater, 2012, p. 866).
In the present study, it is argued that, for the museum investigated in the Netherlands, the same holds up for people who do not actively participate in the membership program. Please note that a large majority of the population pays by direct debit and their memberships are being renewed automatically, possibly putting them in the same stalled ‘state’ as
mentioned by Reavey et al (2013). The question is: does this proposition hold ground also for members that are still fulfilling their yearly contribution? We hypothesize the following:
H2a: Members with a low level of participation activities will have high levels of self-reported probability of retention
This doesn’t necessarily imply that members who do participate in member activities offered by the focal institutions don’t see these benefits as reasons to continue their
membership. We hypothesized that future intentions of members with low participation rates in the membership program don’t differ from highly engaged members. Because of the focus on activities by museum membership managers, it is very important to assess the importance of participation in events and other benefits exactly have for the levels of member retention.
H2b: Members with a high level of participation in activities will have high levels of self-reported probability of retention
Satisfied participants establishing member retention
The member retention rate is seen to be the most important component of market share, and is, according to earlier studies, driven by customer satisfaction. The monitoring of member satisfaction and activity levels is vital to predict future intentions (Garbarino, 1999). A study on the theatre industry found that satisfied theatregoers will consider their overall satisfaction when deciding whether to visit and support the theatre again (Ngobo, 2005).
Bolton et al (1999) found that the duration of the provider-customer relationship is longer for customers who have high levels of cumulative satisfaction with the service and benefits, stating that retention rates of satisfied members would be higher than for those underwhelmed by the services. In addition, Bhattacharya found that duration of membership negatively influences the hazard of lapsing (1998).
Satisfaction feeds into the feeling of engagement (Bhattacharya, C. B., Rao, H., & Glynn, M. A. (1995), and enhances customer loyalty (Deng, Lu, Wei & Zhang (2010) which in turn leads to a higher retention probability. Garbarino et al (1999) found that satisfaction had a direct effect on future intentions, which provides legitimate reasons to propose the construct of satisfaction as a strengthening factor of the relationship between participation and future intentions.
For this study, we define satisfaction as an evaluation based on the general evaluation from members of activities and services, as proposed by Anderson, Fornell, and Lehmann (1994). Rather than capturing the temporary and encounter-specific evaluations and emotions, applied market research tends to measure customer (member) satisfaction as one’s general level of satisfaction based on all experiences with the firm. General satisfaction is a
cumulative construct, summing satisfaction with specific products and services of the
organization and satisfaction with various facets of the firm (Garbarino & Johnson, 1999). We focus on the member evaluations of all the activities they’ve participated in during the past 12 months.
In previous literature, it has also been established that although satisfaction and loyalty are strongly linked, satisfied or even very satisfied customers could still defect (Tapp, 2004). In another study, Ngobo (2005) finds that the probability for a member to lapse increases as the duration of the membership increases. “The longer the relationship the more likely the consumer intends to change/adapt her/his behaviour” (p. 198).
As mentioned earlier, members get various benefits from arts museum such as discounts, seating priority, ease of payment and ticket exchange privileges. A subscriber who drops her/his subscription due to low levels of satisfaction may therefore lose those benefits.
Based on the previously demonstrated significance of member participation and its effects on retention, we propose that lapsing nor retention occurs due to the duration of the member relationship, but that it is caused by a combination of active participation levels and that the level of satisfaction about these experiences moderates the effect on retention:
H3: Member retention is affected by the level of satisfaction regarding member benefits that these members participate in.
Figure 1. The conceptual model for the present study
In the following, a case study among the Friends of a large Dutch national art museum will be utilized to test the proposed hypotheses.
Methods
Research design
To answer the question whether participation is a necessary factor for retaining
museum members with automatically renewed contracts, an online cross-sectional survey was sent out. The questionnaire was distributed through e-mail. The mailing was sent by the email marketing system normally utilized by the museum to keep members up-to-date about news facts and for invitations to special member events. This was opted for in order to enhance the numbers of open rate as members would recognize the consigner. There are multiple reasons as to why this type of design was chosen: the members of this art museum are used to being contacted through online media. In addition, this form of distribution is quick, easy (for the researcher as well as for the informant) and non-costly. The most important reason for choosing this design however, is that the entire population could be reached, which would
allow for results to be interpreted in a more generalizable manner. Thus, the modality of this research is an online questionnaire, distributed by email. For a complete list of the items, see Appendix .
Research site
The research site was a preeminent Dutch art museum. The museum currently has a membership base of 17,000, with several categories of membership, ranging from basic “individual” or “dual” membership (€50 and €75 per year, respectively), to Patrons, a dual membership for €1000 a year. In addition, they offer a dual membership for young
professionals for an annual contribution of €100. For the present study, we focussed on the two basic level membership categories as they form the large majority of the membership base. Members receive ‘standard’ benefits such as free admission to the museum, Fastlane entrance, priority booking for publicly offered programs and discounts on merchandise. In addition, they get invited to special member events, tours and viewing hours, and they regularly receive digital newsletters.
Procedure
The email marketing system used by the focal organization , Clang, allows for a fast and immediate insight into the numbers (open rate and click through rate). It also provided the possibility to send a reminder to those who had not opened the questionnaire the first time. The questionnaire was also fit for mobile devices. The informants were asked to complete the questionnaire individually. For safeguarding the ethical standards, the questionnaire started with a text for informed consent. Also, it stated that confidentiality of the information that they might release would be insured. No incentives were attached to participation in order to avoid undesired motivations for completing the survey. Please note that the survey was in Dutch, but the following report will be in English.
Sample
The research intended to inform about following population: Current, active basic level members with auto-renewal contracts. 7.142 invitations were sent out. The response rate was 12,2%, N=872 but when adapted for the present study, meaning that they had to have been a member for at least one year, resulted in a sample of N =860. The reason for this adaptation was that the items concerning member participation and satisfaction were
measured for the past 12 months. (for an overview of the open rates, see the Appendix). The sample is a probability sample.
Operationalization of concepts and variables
Motivation
The operationalization of the construct motivation was based on previously proposed motivational factors for joining a membership scheme in the arts and leisure industry (Glynn, Bhattacharya & Rao, 1996 ; Bhattacharya, 1995 ; Lansley, 1996 ; Kyle et al., 2006 ; Slater, 2010), and applied them to the specific and most appropriate motivational factors that the fo-cal art museum tries to trigger in their marketing efforts. 4 factors of motivation were distin-guished, namely financial, learning, social bonding and philanthropy. The general question for motivation was: “Why did you choose to become a member of the X museum?”
The items were measured on a Yes or No dichotomy. To reveal the financial factors, the options “For unlimited admission” ; “for discounts in the museum shop”; “financially it is more beneficial to be a member” were proposed. The learning objectives were measured by the items “for invitation to expert tours” ; “for invitations to expert talks” ; “for invitations to previews”, the social bonding factor was measured with the items “to build up a network” ; “to meet other people” and the philanthropic factor was measured simply by one item namely “to support the museum”. The more items per factor responded to with “Yes”, the more
im-portant the financial, learning, social, or philanthropic motivations, respectively, was as-sessed.
Participation
Participation was measured through questions regarding the activity of the members in the pas 12 months. A list of all the organized activities was proposed to them and the re-spondents were asked to simply indicate whether or not they had attended the activity. These were activities such as lectures, private tours, exhibition previews and evening events. The list consisted of 9 items, each representing for 1 activity.
Satisfaction
Satisfaction was measured in two ways: Assessment per activity: respondents were asked to rank each activity they had attended between 1 – 10. After they had indicated in which of the above stated activities they had participated, they were asked to rank on a 10-point scale.
Further measurement of satisfaction was done with 8 items. Participants were asked to rate their general evaluations of all the exclusive member activities they had attended in the past 12 months. This was measured a 5-point scale ranging from “very unsatisfied” to “very satisfied”. The items included ranking of satisfaction level regarding “quality of the activities” “atmosphere of the activities”, “friendliness of the staff” and “variation of activities”.
Retention
Retention was rated with a single item. Respondents were asked to rank on a 5 point scale to what extent they deemed it probable to continue their membership with the museum for the next two years. The scale ranged from “very unlikely” to “ very likely” .
Demographics
The present study had a sample of N= 861 participants. The sample consisted of 347 males (40,6%) and 512 females (59,5%), 0.2% reported different. The majority of the participants reported being between 61 – 70 years old (40.2%). Not surprisingly, in terms of profession, 53% reported to be retired. When asked for the duration of the membership, 25%, 26,3% and 25,5% reported to have been members for respectively 2, 3 and 4 – 5 years.
Table 1. Demographics of the sample
Motivation
For using the construct motivation, a factor analysis was carried out. A principal component analysis with direct Oblimin rotation, shows that the 13 items form a multi-dimensional scale: 5 components have an eigenvalue above 1 (Cumulative eigenvalue 7,23 and explained 55,60% of the variance). The scree plot however shows an inflection after the first two components. But looking at the components, a clear three way distinction can still be made between learning objectives (“for invitation to expert tours” ; “for invitations to expert talks” ; “for invitations to previews” ; “For invitations to content driven evenings”). This component had an eigenvalue of 2,15. The second component (eigenvalue 1,48) was made of items representing financial benefits “For unlimited admission” ; “for discounts in the
museum shop”; “financially it is more beneficial to be a member”. The third component (eigenvalue 1.17) clearly is the social factor containing the items “to build up a network” ; “to meet other people”. The KMO test was 0,73 indicating the sample size was large enough for a factor analysis. The Bartlett’s test also showed significant. Consequently, reliability analyses for the three components were carried out. For the three items representing learning
objectives, Cronbach’s Alpha = .74. Therefore, it appears the scale measures learning
objectives within the motivation construct. For the financial component, reliability showed a Cronbach’s Alpha = .15, therefore, this scale cannot be uutilized in future measurements. The third component measuring social bonding as a motivational factor showed a Cronbach’s Alpha= .37 and could not further be utilized.
Motivation and its effect on retention
The effect of learning motives (M = 1.90 , SD =1.48 on self-reported retention (M = 4,47, SD = .83) was measured next, to test hypothesis 1. A linear regression analysis was carried out between the two variables. The F(21, 49) , df (1) and the regression showed to be significant p <.001, meaning that the learning motives among members predict (only) .02% of the self-reported retention probability (R2 = .02. Learning motives, b* = .09, t = 4,64, p < .001, 95% CI [0.05, 0.12] has a significant yet very weak association with self-reported retention. Per 1 point up on the motivation scale, the self-reported retention increases by 0.08. Therefore we reject the null-hypothesis that learning motives would not predict self-reported member retention.
Participation as an indicator for retention
The next hypothesis stated that members with a low level of participation activities will have high levels of self-reported probability of retention. To test this hypothesis, the direct effect of participation levels on self-reported retention probability must be
demonstrated. Another simple linear regression model was utilized for this test, F(20,49) indicating the following: Participation (M = 1.4 , SD = 1.5) significantly p < .001 predicts the self-reported retention (M = 4.46 , SD = .84). The R2 = .023 meaning that the level of
participation predicts the self-reported retention for .02%. b* = 0.08, t = 4,53, p <.001, 95% CI [0.05 , 0.12]. Per activity that someone participates in more, the self-reported retention increases by 0.08. To a small extent, retention can be explained by participation. As stated above however, multinomial regression might be more appropriate to be applied in the future to weight this effect.
Descriptive statistics show, that 42.6% of the respondents have not engaged in any of the activities in the past 12 months. Because of this finding, a comparison of the mean in self-reported retention was compared between non-participating members and participating members, the latter representing all members that engaged in at least one activity. When only the non-participants were selected, the dependent variable showed (M = 4.31 , SD= .93). When compared to the participants, it showed that (M = 4.57 , SD = .74). This indeed indicates that there is an effect of participation levels on self-reported retention.
The significant regression model as well as the comparison of means between non-participants and non-participants’ self-reported retention let us suggest that this null-hypothesis is not is not rejected. Similarly, hypothesis 2b suggesting that members with a high level of participation in activities will have high levels of self-reported probability of retention also finds support in these results.
Satisfaction evaluations
The concept satisfaction was measured on an 8-item 5 point scale ranging from “very unsatisfied” to “very satisfied”. For using this construct, a factor analysis was carried out. A principal component analysis shows that the 8 items form a single uni-dimensional scale:
only one component has an eigenvalue above 1 (eigenvalue 4.19) and there is a clear point of inflection in the scree plot. All items correlate positively with the first component, the
variable “satisfaction about quality” has the strongest association (factor loading is .78). Reliability of the scale is good, Cronbach’s Alpha .87. Therefore, it appears the scale measures satisfaction about member activities and services.
The interaction effect of satisfaction on the relationship between participation in member activities and self-reported retention is measured with a moderation analysis. First, the correlations between satisfaction, participation and self-reported retention were computed.
There is a significant, moderately strong positive correlation between the level of satisfaction and the self-reported retention: the higher the level of satisfaction, the more likely it is that someone continues his/her membership. r = .30 , p <.001. There is a weak positive correlation between satisfaction and participation. The higher the satisfaction levels, the higher the participation, r = .25 , p <.001 and finally there is a weak positive correlation between participation and self-reported retention: the higher the level of participation, the higher the self-reported retention, r = .15 , p < .001.
The regression model with interaction with the self-reported retention is read as the dependent variable and satisfaction and participation as the independent variables, satisfaction being the moderator, is significant F(20,57) , p < .001. The model can therefore be used to predict self-reported retention, but the strength of the prediction is very weak: 8 per cent of the variation in self-reported retention can be predicted by the interaction effect of satisfaction on participation and it’s direct effect on self-reported retention (R = .08). Participation, b= 0.03, t = 1,06, p = .29 therefore not significant. Satisfaction, b = 0.29, t = 2.22, p <.001 95& CI [0.17 , 0.29]. The interaction between participation and satisfaction b =0.02, t = 0.48 p = 0.63 therefore not significant. explaining . The direct effect of satisfaction on self-reported retention was significant. However the model is significant, interaction was not demonstrated.
Conclusions
This research aimed at provideing clearance for membership professionals to map out the drivers for retention among their membership bases by using the levels of satisfaction, motivation and participation of its members. It tried to answer the overriding question wheth-er in retaining art museum membwheth-ers with contracts that are automatically renewed, participa-tion in exclusive member events organized by the membership managers count as a necessary condition for them to continue their membership. The second research question required re-search into the additional factors of motivation and satisfaction to assess whether or not these too play a role in the retention of art museum members. In order to shed light on this question, an online questionnaire was distributed among the members, the Friends, of a large Dutch art museum. Four separate hypotheses were formulated towards determining the main drives for retention among this group.
The first hypothesis proposed a relationship between the various motivational con-structs explaining members’ considerations in deciding whether or not to join a museum and the sustainability of these relationship. Previous literature shows there has been extent theoret-ical and empirtheoret-ical research on motivation (Armstrong & Slater, 2010 ; Kyle, Absher & Ham-mitt, 2006 ; Maslow, 1943), reporting several different insights into the construct. When linked to the field of art museum membership, authors found that commercial, tangible bene-fits as well as relational, intangible propositions drive individuals to join as a member. Simi-larly, in the present study, the items measuring motivation were also divided up into different factors, confirming earlier findings. One of these factors, learning objectives, was found to have an effect on self-reported retention, partially confirming H1.
The second hypothesis was twofold. First, it proposed that, on the one hand, members who don’t utilize the exclusive benefits would still report a high probability of retention. This was assumed based on recent literature, (Reavey, Howley & Korschun, 2013 ; Slater &
Arm-strong, 2014 ; Slater & ArmArm-strong, 2010), that explored the phenomenon of stalled member-ships, referring to a membership that has lapsed, but is not negatively assessed by the (former) member. Similarly, Holmes and Slater (2012) identify a “new” type of member within the volunteering field which they called the substituter, defined by the authors as “those members who are currently unable to volunteer due to other commitments or lack geographical proxim-ity to the site and show their support in other ways” (i.e. financially) (2012, p. 860) . A similar type of relationship was found among the members of the art museum studied here. When testing for members that had not participated in any activity over the last 12 months and ask-ing them to indicate whether or not they would continue the relationship, a large majority of this group stated that they would. Support for H2a therefore, was found.
Second, it was hypothesized that there would be an effect of the level of participation on the self-reported retention score. Previous literature has supported this assumption (Lans-ley, 199 ; Slater, 2010, Johnson & Garbarino, 1999). As expected, we found this relation to indeed be present among the members of the focal art museum. Higher levels of retention probability were reported by members who had higher participation levels. This, therefore, supports H2b.
For the third hypothesis, the construct satisfaction was taken into account to see whether it had a strengthening effect on the relationship between participation and self-reported retention. Members that had attended at least one of the exclusive member events in the past month were asked to report on a scale whether they were satisfied about the services, quality and benefits. Satisfaction has been seen as an important indicator of retention (Mittal, Ross Jr, & Baldasare, 1998) ; Rust & Zahorik, 1993 ; Deng, Lu, Wei & Zhang, 2010 ; Gar-barino & Johnson, 1999). In this study, we wanted to demonstrate the importance of satisfac-tion within maintaining member relasatisfac-tionships. Findings indeed show a direct effect of the level of satisfaction on the self-reported retention rate, however very weak. No interaction
effect however could be detected between participation and satisfaction on the outcome varia-ble, which leads to the conclusion that H3 was rejected.
Answering RQ1, considering the high levels of self-reported retention among inactive art museum members, it can be stated that members who don’t participate in member activi-ties don’t see these benefits as a necessary condition to maintain their membership.
Answering RQ2, it can be stated that the roles of satisfaction and motivation are im-portant indicators member retention. The direct effect of both constructs on the probability of retention has been demonstrated.
Discussion
From an academic standpoint, this study takes a step forward in filling the gap in the research into the drives for retention of art museum members. However, despite the support for the majority of the hypotheses, a number of limitations must be discussed and suggestions for future research need to be proposed.
The present study carried out empirical research among members of a single art museum. It is therefore hard to defend the generalizability of the findings. On the other hand, the response ratio of the sample compared to the population researched was such that results can be seen as an appropriate reflection of the characteristics of all the members affiliated to the focal institution. Future studies should focus on examining the relationships investigated in this study in other contexts. For example, comparative examination between similar art museums with auto-renewal membership contracts could shed light on the intrinsic differences in motivational factors between members of separate organizations.
The items utilized for measurements of the latent constructs were closely related to the particular membership scheme of this art museum. The motives, for instance, were measured by direct referral to the specific benefits and services that the program offers. Even though
this provided a good basis for operationalization, it caused this study to overlook the construct in a broader context. Future research should focus on further segmenting the factors of
motivation to create general, applicable scales for financial an social objectives for
individuals to join. Another possible limitation for the motivation construct is that this study only focuses on the current active membership base. Future research should determine the motivational drives and barriers for potential members. This would also take experiences with the membership as possible moderators of these motives out of the equation.
In future research, a direct linkage between motives and participation, as proposed by Slater (2010), should further be examined. The assumption that the most prominent initial motivations for joining a membership scheme align with the level of utilization of benefits therefore would need to be tested. For example, a member that indicates to join for
philanthropic reasons, is expected not to value the financial benefits such as discounts and free admission as much as a member that joined based on tangible triggers. Glynn et al (1996), proposed that motivations might also reside in factors of prestige and wanting to engage in “highbrow” cultural activities (1996, p. 271). The present study did not measure those components possibly explaining the self-reported retention probability of non-participating members.
An interesting path for future research is to further examine whether the outcomes demonstrated translate to other levels of membership. For the present study, only the basic level members were surveyed. High level members, as their contribution doesn’t weigh out the benefits they might receive in return, presumably have philanthropic motivations and see membership primarily as a means to support the arts (Glynn et al, 1996). It hasn’t been found whether the retention rate of high level members differs from basic level members of art museums.
Building on the fact that inactivity has been found to indicate philanthropic motivations for joining, might be deceiving for management in that it could cause
membership professionals to lose sight of the potential for upgrading these members to higher levels in the scheme. This research demonstrated that the retention of members with
automatically renewed contracts is not necessarily based on their participation in activities. Thus, the fact that these memberships are ‘silently’ renewed each year does not indicate a losing of interest or simply forgetting about the contract (Reavey et al, 2013). It might, on the contrary, imply that these members are the most loyal supporters with potential for
augmenting their donations.
Participation as an indicator for retention could also be explored further. A limitation of this research is that the measurement of participation was limited to the amount of
exclusive member events attended. Future research should extend the scope of this construct to, for instance, online engagement, measuring the activity of members on the social media platforms of the organizations. Participation might also take additional member activity into account, measuring the amount of times members make purchases in the museum, museum shop, café or web shop.
In terms of satisfaction, a more intricate scale could be proposed, measuring not only the evaluations based on the activities, but also the ratings of the art museum as a whole. Although the particular measurement of satisfaction directly based on experiences was appropriate for the present study, it rules out the general attitudes members have towards the museum.
The fact that this is a cross-sectional study makes that it is unable to demonstrate the actual outcomes. In a longitudinal study, collecting a second wave of data will enable researchers to assess the similarity between the self-reported retention probability and the actual retention rate.
Unfortunately it doesn’t fit well on the basis of the determination. As the low degree of prediction value numbers seem odd, a histogram of the variable was generated. It showed a very skewed image. For future interpretation, a multinomial regression analysis should be carried out.
Reviewing the data, results showed that the distribution of the outcome variable was not normally distributed. A large majority of the respondents reported the maximum self-reported retention score, indicating that they would continue their membership in the following two years. This caused a skewed distribution which affected the regression analyses. In future studies, carrying out a multinomial regression analysis is proposed, for which a new computation of the variable into categories is needed. In this way a more realistic image can be shown regarding the retention report.
References:
tourist experience and satisfaction on the relationship between involvement and recommendation intention. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 4(4), 213-221.
Armstrong, K., & Slater, A. (2011). Understanding motivational constraints to membership at the Southbank Centre. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 10(4), 353-373.
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of management review, 14(1), 20-39
Bhattacharya, C. B., Rao, H., & Glynn, M. A. (1995). Understanding the bond of identifica- tion: An investigation of its correlates among art museum members. The Journal of Marketing, 46-57.
Bhattacharya, C. B. (1998). When customers are members: Customer retention in paid mem-
bership contexts. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 26(1), 31-44
Bolton, R. N. (1998). A dynamic model of the duration of the customer's relationship with a
continuous service provider: The role of satisfaction. Marketing science, 17(1), 45-65.
Bolton, R. N., & Lemon, K. N. (1999). A dynamic model of customers' usage of services: Us-
age as an antecedent and consequence of satisfaction. Journal of marketing research, 171-186.
Bourdieu, P. (2011). The forms of capital.(1986). Cultural theory: An anthology, 1, 81-93.
Burns Sadek Research. (1993). Qualitative Research Conducted to Examine the Motivations ‘
for Membership of Friends' Schemes. Arts Council.
Camarero, C., & José Garrido, M. (2011). Incentives, organisational identification, and relationship quality among members of fine arts museums. Journal of Service Management, 22(2), 266-287.
Cornwell, T. B., & Coote, L. V. (2005). Corporate sponsorship of a cause: the role of identification in purchase intent. Journal of Business Research, 58(3), 268-276. Deng, Z., Lu, Y., Wei, K. K., & Zhang, J. (2010). Understanding customer satisfaction and
loyalty: An empirical study of mobile instant messages in China. International journal of information management, 30(4), 289-300.
Everett, M. C., & Barrett, M. S. (2011). Benefits visitors derive from sustained engagement with a single museum. Curator: The Museum Journal, 54(4), 431-446.
Garbarino, E., & Johnson, M. S. (1999). The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commit ment in customer relationships. the Journal of Marketing, 70-87
George, M., & Wakefield, K. L. (2018). Modeling the consumer journey for membership ser- vices. Journal of Services Marketing, 32(2), 113-125.
Glynn, M. A., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Rao, H. (1996). Art museum membership and cultural
distinction: Relating members' perceptions of prestige to benefit usage. Poetics, 24(2-4), 259-274. Hayes, D., & Slater, A. (2003). From ‘social club’ to ‘integrated membership scheme’:
developing membership schemes strategically. International Journal of Nonprofit and V Voluntary Sector Marketing, 8(1), 59-75.
Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., & Gremler, D. D. (2002). Understanding relationship marketing outcomes: an integration of relational benefits and relationship
quality. Journal of service research, 4(3), 230-247.
Holmes, K., & Slater, A. (2012). Patterns of voluntary participation in membership
ssociations: A study of UK heritage supporter groups. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(5), 850-869.
through cultural activities in museums. Journal of Leisure Research, 43(4), 560-588.
Johnson, J. W., Peck, J., & Schweidel, D. A. (2014). Can purchase behavior predict
relationship perceptions and willingness to donate?. Psychology & Marketing, 31(8), 647-659.
Kotler, N., & Kotler, P. (1998). Museum Strategy and Marketing: Designing
Missions. Building Audiences.
Kyle, G. T., Absher, J. D., Hammitt, W. E., & Cavin, J. (2006). An examination of the
motivation involvement relationship. Leisure Sciences, 28(5), 467-485.
Lansley, J. (1996). Membership participation and ideology in large voluntary organisations:
the case of the National Trust. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 7(3), 221-240.
Mallison, T. R. (2016). Summit County Historical Society: A Membership Program Case
Study (Doctoral dissertation, University of Akron).
Marinova, D., & Singh, J. (2014). Consumer decision to upgrade or downgrade a service
membership. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 42(6), 596-618.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological review, 50(4), 370.
Mittal, V., Ross Jr, W. T., & Baldasare, P. M. (1998). The asymmetric impact of negative and
positive attribute-level performance on overall satisfaction and repurchase intentions. The Journal of Marketing, 33-47.
Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship market- ing. The journal of marketing, 20-38.
Ngobo, P. V. (2005). Drivers of upward and downward migration: An empirical investigation among theatregoers. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 22(2), 183-201. O'Reilly, D., Rentschler, R., & Kirchner, T. A. (Eds.). (2013). The Routledge Companion to
Arts Marketing. Routledge.
Olsson, A. K. (2010). A+- tourist attraction’s members: Their motivations, relations and roles. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 10(4), 411-429.
Paswan, A. K., & Troy, L. C. (2004). Non-profit organization and membership motivation: An exploration in the museum industry. Journal of Marketing Theory and
Practice, 12(2), 1-15.
Peasley, M. C., Coleman, J. T., & Royne, M. B. (2017). Charitable motivations: the role of prestige and identification. The Service Industries Journal, 1-17.
Raymond, C. (1992). Members matter: making the most of your membership scheme, London: Arts Council of Great Britain.
Reavey, B., Howley, M. J., & Korschun, D. (2013). An exploratory study of stalled relation ships among art museum members. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 18(2), 90-100.
Reichheld, F. F., & Teal, T. (1996). The loyalty effect, Harvard business school press. Boston, MA.
Rust, R. T., & Zahorik, A. J. (1993). Customer satisfaction, customer retention, and market Share. Journal of retailing, 69(2), 193-215.
Slater, A. (2003a). Users or supporters? Understanding motivations and behaviors of museum members. Curator: The Museum Journal, 46(2), 182-207.
Slater, A. (2003b). An audit of friends' schemes at UK heritage sites. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 9(4), 357-373.
national Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 9(3), 238-260. Slater, A., & Armstrong, K. (2010). Involvement, Tate, and me. Journal of Marketing Man
agement, 26(7-8), 727-748.
Slater, A., & Armstrong, K. (2014). Drivers and motives for membership at the Southbank Centre, a mixed arts venue in London, UK. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 19(1), 1-13.
Tapp, A. (2004). The loyalty of football fans—We'll support you evermore?. Journal of Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management, 11(3), 203-215.
Thompson, John B. (2010). Introduction in Merchants of Culture (pp. 1 – 25). Cambridge, UK: Polity press.
Todd, S., & Lawson, R. (2001). Lifestyle segmentation and museum/gallery visiting
behaviour. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 6(3), 269-277.
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.
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral consequences of ser- vice quality. the Journal of Marketing, 31-46.
Zijlstra, H. (2011). Meer dan kwaliteit: een nieuwe visie op cultuurbeleid. Ministerie van onderwijs, cultuur en wetenschap.
Appendix I
Complete List of items:
q09 Wat waren voor u de vornaamste redenen om u in te schrijven als Vriend/Patroon van het Museum X?
q13 Hoe waarschijnlijk is het dat u het lidmaatschap als Vriend/Patroon van het Museum X zult aanbevelen bij andere mensen?
q16 Welke van de onderstaande activiteiten van de vrienden/ patronen heeft u in de afgelo-pen 12 maanden bezocht?
o Vriendenpreview Small wonders (juni 2017) o Vrienden nieuwjaarconcert (januari 2017) o Lezing Counterculture (september 2017) o Preview Maris & Maelwael (oktober 2017) o Speeddaten (november 2017)
o Vriendenpreview Goede Hoop (februari 2017) o Fotografie lezing Star Vu (maart 2017)
o Serieus gesprek Lucas van Leyden (mei 2017)
Kunt u hieronder aangeven in hoeverre u tevreden bent over de voor de vrienden/Patronen georganiseerde activiteiten die u in de afgelopen 12 maanden heeft bezocht?
o zeer ontevreden o ontevreden
o niet tevreden ,niet ontevreden o tevreden
o zeer tevreden
Leerzaamheid van de activiteiten zeer tevreden
Kwaliteit van de activiteiten Sfeer tijdens de activiteiten
Vriendelijkheid van het personeel tijdens de activiteiten
Aanwezigheid van prettige medebezoekers tijdens de activiteiten Goede horecavoorziening tijdens de activiteiten
Mogelijkheid om te netwerken tijdens de activiteiten
q Denkt u dat u in de komende twee jaar Vriend/Patroon van het Museum X zult blijven? o Zeker niet
o Waarschijnlijk niet
o Misschien wel, misschien niet o Waarschijnlijk wel
o Zeker wel
q Bent u man of vrouw? q Wat is uw leeftijd?
q Wat zijn de 4 cijfers van uw postcode? q Wat is uw hoogst voltooide opleiding?
q Wat is de samenstelling van uw huishouding?
q Welke beschrijving sluit het best aan bij uw huidige (werk)situatie? Groep Welke groep: Vriend | Extra | Patroon
Appendix II Open rate
Appendix 3
SYNTAX Descriptives
DATASET ACTIVATE DataSet1.
DESCRIPTIVES VARIABLES=Geslacht /ORDER=ANALYSIS.
DATASET ACTIVATE DataSet1. DESCRIPTIVES VARIABLES=Leeftijd /ORDER=ANALYSIS.
Factor Analysis Motivation FACTOR
/VARIABLES Motivatie_1 Motivatie_2 Motivatie_3 Motivatie_4 Motivatie_5 Motivatie_6 Motivatie_7
Motivatie_8 Motivatie_9 Motivatie_10 Motivatie_11 Motivatie_12 Motivatie_19 /MISSING LISTWISE
/ANALYSIS Motivatie_1 Motivatie_2 Motivatie_3 Motivatie_4 Motivatie_5 Motivatie_6 Motivatie_7
Motivatie_8 Motivatie_9 Motivatie_10 Motivatie_11 Motivatie_12 Motivatie_19
/FORMAT SORT BLANK(.30) /PLOT EIGEN
/CRITERIA MINEIGEN(1) ITERATE(25) /EXTRACTION PAF
/CRITERIA ITERATE(25) DELTA(0) /ROTATION OBLIMIN
/METHOD=CORRELATION.
Reliability analysis
Motivation (learning objectives) RELIABILITY
/VARIABLES=Motivatie_5 Motivatie_6 Motivatie_7 Motivatie_8 /SCALE('ALL VARIABLES') ALL
/MODEL=ALPHA /SUMMARY=TOTAL.
Motivation (financial reasons) RELIABILITY
/VARIABLES=Motivatie_3 Motivatie_12 /SCALE('ALL VARIABLES') ALL /MODEL=ALPHA
/SUMMARY=TOTAL. Motivation (social reasons) RELIABILITY
/VARIABLES=Motivatie_1 Motivatie_9 /SCALE('ALL VARIABLES') ALL
/MODEL=ALPHA /SUMMARY=TOTAL. Scale for learning objectives
COMPUTE Motivation_LearningObjectives=(Motivatie_5 + Motivatie_6 + Motivatie_7 + Motivatie_8).
EXECUTE.
Support for multinomial regression
FREQUENCIES VARIABLES=Verwachting_VriendBlijven_numeriek /NTILES=4
/STATISTICS=STDDEV MINIMUM MAXIMUM SEMEAN MEAN MEDIAN MODE /HISTOGRAM
/ORDER=ANALYSIS.
Factor Analysis for Satisfaction FACTOR
/VARIABLES Tevredenheid_numeriek_Leerzaam Tevredenheid_numeriek_Kwaliteit Tevredenheid_numeriek_Sfeer Tevredenheid_numeriek_Afwisseling
Tevredenheid_numeriek_VriendelijkheidPersoneel Tevreden-heid_numeriek_Medebezoekers
Tevredenheid_numeriek_Horeca Tevredenheid_numeriek_Netwerken /MISSING LISTWISE
/ANALYSIS Tevredenheid_numeriek_Leerzaam Tevredenheid_numeriek_Kwaliteit Tevredenheid_numeriek_Sfeer Tevredenheid_numeriek_Afwisseling
Tevredenheid_numeriek_VriendelijkheidPersoneel Tevreden-heid_numeriek_Medebezoekers
/PRINT UNIVARIATE INITIAL CORRELATION SIG KMO EXTRACTION ROTATION /FORMAT SORT BLANK(.30)
/PLOT EIGEN
/CRITERIA MINEIGEN(1) ITERATE(25) /EXTRACTION PAF
/CRITERIA ITERATE(25) DELTA(0) /ROTATION OBLIMIN
/METHOD=CORRELATION. Reliability of the satisfaction scale RELIABILITY /VARIABLES=Tevredenheid_numeriek_Leerzaam Tevredenheid_numeriek_Kwaliteit Tevredenheid_numeriek_Sfeer Tevredenheid_numeriek_Afwisseling Tevredenheid_numeriek_VriendelijkheidPersoneel Tevreden-heid_numeriek_Medebezoekers Tevredenheid_numeriek_Horeca Tevredenheid_numeriek_Netwerken /SCALE('ALL VARIABLES') ALL
/MODEL=ALPHA /SUMMARY=TOTAL.
Moderation effect of satisfaction on participation and self-reported retention
Saving standardized values for the two independent variables participation and satisfaction DESCRIPTIVES VARIABLES=Gem_Part Tevredenheid_numeriek_gemiddeld
/SAVE
/STATISTICS=MEAN STDDEV MIN MAX. Computing the moderator variable
EXECUTE.
Moderation analysis’ REGRESSION
/DESCRIPTIVES MEAN STDDEV CORR SIG N /MISSING LISTWISE
/STATISTICS COEFF OUTS CI(95) R ANOVA COLLIN TOL ZPP /CRITERIA=PIN(.05) POUT(.10)
/NOORIGIN
/DEPENDENT Verwachting_VriendBlijven_numeriek /METHOD=ENTER ZSco01 ZSco02 Moderator.
Figure 1. The histogram showing the a-normally distributed values of self-reported retention calling for transformation of the variable into nominal categories.
