Museums the Collapse of the Welfare-State

7/29/2019 Museums the Collapse of the Welfare-State

1/9

1

Humberto Rendeiro

MUSEUMS: THE COLLAPSE OF THE WELFARE-STATE

AND THE EMERGENCE OF STRATEGIC PHILANTHROPY

EUROPEAN MUSEUM ADVISORS CONFERENCE 2012

The crisis as a challenge to do more and better

COMMERCIAL ENTREPRENEURISM, PHILANTROPY AND GOVERNMENT SUBSIDY

Panel organised by ICOM Portugal

National Museum of Archaeology LisbonJune 02


2/9

2

Introductory Notes

The way museums present themselves to society nowadays does not match the

definitions which have been ascribed to them. The majority of museums has adopted,

even if automatically, a business-like behavior, in order to cope with the Stateseconomic and financial constraints. This has led them to create a new acting paradigm.

With the collapse of the Welfare-State, also reflected in the lack of support to culture,

those in charge of the cultural heritage were forced to innovate and to adapt themselves

to different management models. A new concept of museum was created. We are now

witnessing a new age in museology.

As a result of these transformations, museums have become closer to local communities

and more attentive to stakeholders, the interested parties. From this connection,

emerged natural partnership and collaboration bonds, which can be referred to as

strategic philanthropy or causes marketing.

With this study we aim at showing how financial crisis is related to cultural

innovation

The collapse of the Welfare-State

The concept of Welfare-State arose in the end of the nineteenth century, with

Bismark, as a response to the threat of class struggle when faced with the expansion of

socialism. The Welfare-State had as its main goal to sever the image of the State as a

political agent, thus transforming it into a social agent (DRUCKER, 2012). The State

emerged as the keeper of social society, insuring all individuals the coverage of risks

and the access to assets and services, aiming at an effective social inclusion (PEREIRA,

2012). That is, a State which would protect both in sickness and unemployment,

providing for primary health care, which instigates the access to culture and education.

However, the Welfare-State proved financially unsustainable and, in the current

socioeconomic state of affairs, we are witnessing the fading out of this governance

model.

This situation is even worse since there is no sustainable alternative to the

ineffectiveness of this model, leading those who depend on it to disbelief, uncertainty


3/9

3

and fear of forthcoming days. You should also bear in mind that States are, usually, the

biggest employers, which means that any downfalls it might suffer, will carry large-

scale collateral damage. This means that a big State is not necessarily a strong one and

that, in adverse conditions just like the economic and financial ones we are facing now,

many of the pillars and structures sustaining a government may collapse (DRUCKER,

2012).

According to what has been mentioned previously, public Portuguese museums, as

Non-profitable Organizations, belonging to the tertiary sector and financially

dependent on the State, are now being faced with a rather delicate situation, as their

source of sustainability is increasingly scarce, which is leaving them in the brink of

poverty. On the other hand, if we take into account that museums financing comesfrom public funds, own revenues and sponsors/donations, it is vital that the latter be

regarded with seriousness, professionalism and tenacity (AZEVEDO, 2012), with the

current States retraction. This means that, due to the economic constraints, States

cannot fulfill their full obligations and institutions dependent on the State have had to

find alternative paths for sustainability. This situation leads us to question the current

management models of the Portuguese museums, as far as debating the need to import

and implement models from for-profit organizations. Museums today have to deal withmany issues: merges, inventory, conservation, research, exhibiting, the increase in their

action scope, a bigger exposure to competition and higher demands from the

stakeholders as well as a dependence on a strategic marketing plan to communicate

well. This situation makes us believe that applying good examples of private

management might help to ease the future of museums. It should be stressed, however,

that we do not partake the concept of museum-business company. On the contrary, we

defend that it is the States responsibility to insure the sustainability of the cultural

heritage and that it should, once and for all, recognize the value of museums in the

development of the regions which they are part of. However, it has to be stated that,

nowadays, we are now witnessing in the national museum panorama, a hybrid model of

patrimonial management, in the worst sense of the word. That is to say that, on the one

hand, the State is not fulfilling its obligation by retracting cultures financing. On the

other hand, when museums adopt, albeit involuntarily, a business company posture,

they are assuming a behaviour which is not theirs. It is vital, therefore, to define and

update what is expected and meant by museums in the twenty first century.


4/9

4

Cultural Innovation

Cultural innovation is understood as the change in attitude adopted by cultural

institutions, in order to cope with the economic-financial constraints experienced today.

Innovation means, therefore, the introduction of something new. One could even talk

about the introduction of a new paradigm in how museums today play their role in

society. By accepting that the crisis is a challenge to do more and better we are

accrediting the idea that there was a need to innovate, to embrace new challenges and to

diversify both intervention and posture. Museums today are more than mere physical

spaces with a given collection. Likewise, if museums were firstly seen as warehouses

for curiosities or odd items, only accessible to a restricted fringe of society, today

museums are modern and pleasant places, focused, as never before, on their cultural and

educational impact and, foremost, open to communities (RENDEIRO, 2010).

This cultural innovation is also intimately connected with the fact that museums

today, as non-profitable organizations, do not have, as of yet, the obligation to generate

profit (in the strictly economic meaning of the term) in order to justify their existence,

unlike what happens to business companies. It should be stressed, however, that

museums bring added value, even if not generating profit, and often become true

economic leverages of specific regions. However, the inexistence of the pressure to

produce profit allows them to bet more and higher, to invest in new ideas, new services

and new approaches (AZEVEDO, 2012). Despite this, it should also be insured that the

behavior of cultural innovation does not clash with the institutions good name and do

not endanger the image of rigor and seriousness demanded from it.

However, since they are implemented in a specific community, because they relate to

the other stakeholders and because they need to find alternative ways of providing for

themselves, museums and their professionals have had the possibility of creating new

products, new services and identifying new opportunities to satisfy their audiences. The

following examples of such are the establishment of partnerships, the management of

their own revenue, the enthralling of sponsors or benefactors, the introduction of

cultural marketing, joining social networks and outsourcing contracts. These are

examples of what being a museum is and how to do museology today, in todays world.


5/9

5

For all this, regardless of the posture one adopts before this vital pressing question,

should it be acceptance or denial, the truth is that museums today are more than a

permanent, non-profit institution.

Museums and communication

The use of communication in museums, as a strategic tool in their current management,

should aim at stressing a reliable brand, which offers valuable proposals, captivating

and brining added-value. It is unquestionable that the value of museums relies on their

collections, their assets and their buildings. However, as it can be inferred from what

mentioned before, it is not enough that museums open their doors to seduce andcaptivate their audience. The answer to the ever demanding needs of the public and

stakeholders relies partially in professionalizing communication, i.e., in how museums

affirm their value and relevance. Despite this, it must be taken into account that pockets

of resistance to communication are not seldom found, as it is still though that

communication is not determinant to the core business of museums.

It is accepted that museums should not rely solely on communication but, without it,

survival is also compromised. There should place, within the institution, to preserve,

research and exhibit, but also to communicate. Museums are also their own public and

communication is the link between both.

If one considers how museums are increasingly dependent on private funding and how

the establishment of partnerships and the captivating of benefactors are some of the

viable alternatives to the States cuts, adopting a socially responsible management

system is urgent, which includes being aware of the stakeholders expectations,

providing them with answers and being accountable to them.

This clarity of action can only be achieved through an effective and strategically

oriented communication policy. Therefore, communicating is more than joining several

social networks, being part of mailing lists or feeding blogs. Communicating relies in

making the institution know, transforming it into a prestigious brand and aligning both

collaborators and mission for the same purpose.


6/9

6

Only by following an effective communication, which inspires, motivates and prompts

action can the attention of potential benefactors, sponsors or partners be caught

(AZEVEDO, 2012). We reiterate, thus, that the relevance of communicating in

museums is just not the need to attract more and new audiences; it also lies in

seducing potential philanthropists.

What is strategic philanthropy?

The concept of a business company, in the most immediate sense of the term, refers to

the exploration of an activity with economic interest. A good performance by business

companies where this is concerned, without which financial survival is not insured,further announces the fulfilment of what being a good employer is, as well as the

notions of citizenship and neighbourhood practises. However, business companies, as

institutions mirroring society, are more than an economic tool. Business companies are

also a political and social being. That means that business companies responsibility

runs deeper than economics. They are socially responsible (DRUCKER, 2012). The

social responsibility of business companies, or triple bottom line, is made of three

essential pillars: economy, environment and society. It is by fulfilling their social

obligations that business companies might be able to establish cooperation ties with the

tertiary sector, namely with museums. Those responsible for patrimonial management,

as well as business companies and the respective political enforcers and tutelary entities

will be responsible for grabbing this new way for sustainability and establish

collaboration partnerships/agreements which aim at, on the one hand, insure bigger

financial autonomy for museums and, on the other hand, enable the fulfillment of the

social responsibility business companies are bound to. Therefore, strategic philanthropy

or causes marketing is regarded as the establishment of partnerships between business

companies and museums, enabling the joint promotion of causes, events or campaigns.

Each involved entity will be responsible for making its skills and resources available for

the partnership (AZEVEDO, 2012).

The fact that the cultural sector has been given shorter budgets than necessary has led

museums to adopt measures that insure self-sustainability. As examples of this we could

name: the creation of partnership networks, their own revenue management, thecaptivating of sponsors and benefactors and outsourcing contracts. However, we deem


7/9

7

better to discuss whether these solutions are enough to make up for the lack of

investment in culture by the State and if these can be transversally used in Portuguese

museums and palaces. Amongst these measures, we believe that the development of

partnership networks with the local communities, not only guarantees bigger

independence from the state and insuring the promotion of the museological space, also

increases the integration of the community. This is a practice, which has been

institutionalized, in the vast majority of cultural equipment. It is vital, however, to

mention that the concept of local community also encompasses its public, the economic

and institutional agents (stakeholders). Some examples of institutions that are part of the

local community are: Town Halls, Local Parishes, Associations, Safety Enforcement

institutions, Universities, Schools, Nursing Homes, Industry, Commerce and so on It

is the responsibility of those in charge to nourish this integration, deepening bonds with

potential partners. Furthermore, the bureaucracy-free in which partnership contracts rely

favors their establishment, making them feasible for all national museums and palaces.

Furthermore, the wider the area of the partnership network, the smaller the influence of

the government will be.

The support given by benefactors is, because of its own features, mostly related to big

business companies, particularly international ones, where this type of action is aimedspecially at bigger interest and visibility projects. Thus, we believe that there is a highly

specific area of action for all issues related to this type of fundraising. That does not

mean, however, that one cannot find, nationally, particular situations of the support by

benefactors or that museums cannot access this type of support, regardless of its

geographical situation. However, as we move further away from the biggest urban

centers, we can not only see the decrease in the number of companies aware for this

type of action but also the increase in the number of regional museums. We believe,

therefore, that there is major background work to be done, namely the change in

legislation associated with sponsorship, making this a less bureaucratic process and

fiscally more attractive. On the other hand, if we take into consideration the Portuguese

business fabric, which is based in Small and Medium-sized companies, it is determinant

to the establishment of a clarification with business companies, so that it becomes

common knowledge the benefits of supporting culture. These awareness sessions should

be seen as benefit meetings with sponsors, following the example of what takes place in

the USA, where culture is largely subsidized by the private sector (RENDEIRO, 2011).


8/9

8

We consider that, in the current moment of financial crisis, a safe path to insure more

sustainability for national museums has not been created. However, we believe it is

fundamental that new bonds of cooperation with the local community are created, thus

integrating it, and also that a joint marketing strategy is outlined, aiming at promoting

and boosting museums, thus encouraging the proximity between external entities and

the creation of a strategic philanthropy by business companies. However, in parallel

with these new sources of funding, which are based on fundraising, a direct and

effective support by the State must remain, without which the concept of the self-

sustainability of museums is nothing more than utopic.

Final notes

One could question whether crises are in fact a challenge to do more and better or

whether opportunities exist, regardless of the economic and financial scenario we live

in. It is believed that the issue lies in the difficulty to bring together people with ideas,

people with problems and people with the institutional resources and the financial

means, attempting to overcome and satisfy common needs (AZEVEDO, 2012). To do

so, we believe it mandatory to have a different attitude towards the problem of public

finances, which encourage practices different from the ones we have today. Namely, on

what concerns the cultural sector, unlike what happens now, an increasing financial and

budget autonomy should be stimulated for example, so that the projects museums are

involved in do not fade away, drowned in bureaucracy. The State, by cutting down on

financing museums and depriving them of autonomy, is condemning one of the sectors

of economic development to lethargy. That is, other than the disappearance of the

concept of a Welfare-state which fosters and supports social causes, we are now

witnessing a State which discourages cultural action, failing to recognize the relevance

and value heritage has in national economy.

On the other hand, museums, by adopting a new posture of facing economic and

financial difficulties, have created a new paradigm of action which might be referred to

as cultural innovation. Nowadays, museums are far more than a simple permanent,

non-profit institution. We are watching a turning point on what is still thought of

museums and what museums are turning into. This change will lead to an opportunityfor those responsible for cultural heritage to attract more and new partners through


9/9

9

strategic philanthropy or causes marketing. That means that, on the one hand, museums

have been able to extend their value and prestige to the service of society and that, on

the other hand, local communities, in the wider sense of the term, also need to associate

with museums. The difficulty lies in knowing how to advertise culture.

Bibliography

AZEVEDO, Carlos; FRANCO Raquel Campos; MENESES Joo Wengorovius

Gesto de Organizaes Sem Fins Lucrativos o desafio da inovao social, Porto,

Impulso Positivo, 2012.

DRUCKER, Peter F.Uma sociedade funcional, D. Quixote, 2012.

FERREIRA, Ftima CamposPortugal e o Futuro: dez contributos fundamentais para

recuperar um pas em crise, Lisboa, Matria-prima, 2011.

PEREIRA, Paulo TrigoPortugal: dvida pblica e dfice democrtico, Lisboa, FFMS,

Relgio Dgua, 2012.

RENDEIRO, Humberto Arqutipos para uma gesto museolgica sustentvel,

http://conimbriga.academia.edu/, 2011.

RENDEIRO, HumbertoGesto de Museus: caminhos para a auto-sustentabilidade.

ICOM.PT, Srie II, n13, (Jun-Ago 11), 2011, pp. 2-10.

RENDEIRO, Humberto Parcerias, Receitas Prprias e Mecenato: desafios para a

gesto museolgica. O Museu de Francisco Tavares Proena Jnior: um estudo de

caso,http://conimbriga.academia.edu/, 2010
http://conimbriga.academia.edu/http://conimbriga.academia.edu/http://conimbriga.academia.edu/http://conimbriga.academia.edu/http://conimbriga.academia.edu/http://conimbriga.academia.edu/http://conimbriga.academia.edu/

Museums the Collapse of the Welfare-State

Documents

Transcript of Museums the Collapse of the Welfare-State