How the Pandemic will change us: Museums and other Cultural Institutions
This essay examines the expected long term shifts in cultural institutions, such as museums, due to the pandemic. It is less concerned with short term changes (i.e. how do we bring people back?), but more with understanding permanent shifts.
Specifically I aim to answer three questions: (1) What changes from the pandemic will hold true beyond reopening (e.g. five years from now?) (2) What are the results of those changes? and (3) How should museums and other cultural institutions prepare for such changes?
Museums and other cultural institutions have adopted a multitude of changes since the pandemic: limiting capacity, imposing mask mandates, selling timed ticket for general admission, cutting staff, moving to remote working, and moving content online.
The biggest permanent change we will see is a move towards digitization that results in increased customer-centricity and new “ways of working” for these institutions. The other adaptations cultural institutions have adopted are only temporary. After we reopen and the pandemic is behind us, there will be no need for mask mandates, funding will return, cultural institutions that appear closed will reopen, and staff will be rehired. Even as content begins to be digitized, this does not suggest the end of cultural institutions — the intimacy associated with being in person cannot be replicated digitally; you experience an in-person concert or performance with other audience members, forming a collective body, as well as interact with the performers, making each iteration of the performance unique. Ultimately museums will equilibrate at a hybrid model of operation with significant digital content as well as robust in-person activities tailored to developing customer loyalty.
THE MOVE TOWARDS DIGITIZATION
Museums and other cultural institutions have adapted to the pandemic digitally. The De Young Museum of Fine Arts in San Francisco, the San Francisco Opera, as well as the Metropolitan Museum of Arts in New York all offer digital programming in the form of workshops, performances, or artist talks. Similarly, comedy shows have had their fair share of Zoom calls. Chanel’s most recent fashion show had a one-person audience with the show released only on video.
Even when we return in person, digital programming will not be done away with. We’ve gotten too good at sharing content through digital means and there’s clearly a demand for experiencing art digitally. Nor should we get rid of digital programming as it allows for greater access and democratization of art. Those who can’t afford to pay for tickets or means of transportation can experience — though in a different form-—the same art.
Not only will art be increasingly experienced digitally, but it will also be increasingly sold and created digitally. Currently buying fine art often requires in-person attendance to an auction house. Now many auction houses have moved to an online platform where art is now more accessible and prices are more transparent. On the other hand, if art can be expected to be consumed digitally , there will be art that is made for specifically digital means. I’m not talking more videos or even VR but performance based art that can only be viewed in the “ large gallery view” of a Zoom Room.
To keep up with the digitization of the arts, new platforms and software will need to be developed and continuously improved — such as a platform for better tracking and validating the accuracy of bids on artwork or platforms tailored to optimize the interaction between the work of art and the user (e.g. the user can click on a dancer in a ballet performance to “zoom in” on them.)
INCREASED CUSTOMER CENTRICITY
If we fast forward a few years to the point at which most institutions have digitized their content, we run into an issue that we face on social media — there is too much content. Thus similar to social media platforms, cultural institutions will need to compete for the attention of their users. Rather than monopolizing the attention of their users through the addictive means, cultural institutions should build loyal bases by critically examining and satisfying the needs of their local communities. Thus cultural institutions will become increasingly customer-centric, shifting both their programming and their funding structure to focus on more local and loyal populations.
If users have access to content from anywhere in the world, why would they even attend in-person? While it is true that some in-person experiences cannot be replaced digitally, if I can view the entire collection of the Louvre and even attend an artist talk from the comfort of my home, the incentive for visiting the city of Paris has decreased.
This poses a challenge for cultural institutions as most of their funding is based off ticket sales. Thus cultural institutions must find other ways to generate revenue, preferably ways that incentive individuals to attend in-person and to keep coming back. For example, art museums shift from just hosting art pieces to hosting their own art classes or even bringing in an expert artist to teach a “masterclasses.” Theaters shift from being a place to watch performances to immersive experiences, where you enter the world of the performance, meeting the cast members, learning about the creation of the performance etc. In general, cultural institutions need to shift from charging for access to art to an organization that charges for services that are related to and enhance the experience of art.
To establish a loyal base, cultural institutions must understand the needs of their local population. Relying solely on revenue from tourists will no longer be sustainable as more content becomes digitized. Thus cultural institutions should develop deep and long-standing partnerships with local organizations such as schools and other nonprofits. Cultural institutions must also increasingly democratize the art they offer to appeal to younger generations who are increasing concerned with equitable representation and access, and less concerned or informed about the “old masters. ” Particularly when we reflect on the conversations that have occurred this summer around the Black Lives Matter movement. This suggests another potential source of revenue for cultural institutions as “brokers” — or even better “avenues for dialogue” — between local artists and the local population. For example, art museums can consistently carry art from local artists that can be bought by museum attendees. Theaters allow local performers stage time before the main performance begins.
A final idea around incentivizing continuous in-person attendance lies around limited ticket sales. Not only does limiting ticket sales (for attendance, for workshops etc.) provide a more intimate experience for the attendee but it also manufactures demand which could drive further sales due to the idea of scarcity. Note that limiting ticket sales doesn’t mean that cultural institutions will be inaccessible, as all content is assumed to be digitized and freely accessible, rather, it means that cultural institutions will shift their focus from the contents they offer to the experiences they create.
NEW WAYS OF WORKING
As discussed above, cultural institutions will need to adopt new funding models to adjust to increased digitization. Already, this is one “new way of working” that will occur in cultural institutions. These institutions will also need to consider new operating and staffing models. With increased digitization, cultural institutions will need more individuals with software and technology expertise. Additionally, with a shift towards experiences, these institutions may need to stand up entire new departments dedicated to understanding user needs and optimizing user experiences.
One change that will most certainly remain post-pandemic, regardless of industry, is remote working. It has worked surprisingly well and I expect that most jobs that can work remotely, will continue to have some component of remote working. This will hold true for cultural institutions whose current operations are all remote. Certainly, many activities will return to being in person, however some (e.g. hosting workshops with artists who are not local) will remain remote. Thus museums should expect to have to develop flexible working structures to enable a hybrid way of working.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the pandemic has not catalyzed the “end of the arts” but rather its shift towards the digital, which will require cultural institutions to more immediately to continue sustaining digital operations while resuming in person operations. Eventually these institutions will need to shift their focus to building local and loyal customer bases by offering experiences rather than just access to the arts.
NOTES AND REFERENCES
The thoughts in this essay were mostly formed around changes to large art museums with some consideration for performance halls, movie theaters, comedy clubs. Some of these changes are applicable to science museums, however science museums have additional nuance that has not been investigated