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

4.3. 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

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 Y.

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

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.

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

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).

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

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.

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

(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

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

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

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

>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

CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CHANNEL

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,

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 Expert

Museum Function Expert City, Province

M1

FOAM photography museum

Manager, Marketing & Communications

Amsterdam

M2 Hermitage & de Nieuwe kerk

Head Exhibition Amsterdam

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

Amsterdam

M4 De Pont Head, Education Tilburg

M5 Beeld & Geluid Manager, Creative Industries & Media

M6 Maurtishuis Head, Marketing Den Haag

M7 Boijmans van Beuningen Director, Exhibitions Rotterdam M8 Rijksmuseum Head, Communication &

Marketing

Amsterdam

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

Amsterdam

M10 Amsterdam Museum Employee, Public Affairs & Education

Amsterdam

M11 Kröller Müller Museum Coordinator, Education Otterloo M12 Groninger Museum Head of Communication,

PR & Marketing

Groningen

M13 Drents Museum Head, Public Affairs Drenthe

M14 Scheepvaart Museum Educator Amsterdam

M15 Stedelijk Museum SenioreMarketer, Marketing& Communication

Amsterdam

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.

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