The museumenvironment

261

European Journal of Marketing,Vol. 34 No. 3/4, 2000, pp. 261-278.

# MCB University Press, 0309-0566

The museum environment andthe visitor experience

Christina GouldingDepartment of Marketing and Economics,

Wolverhampton Business School, Wolverhampton, UK

Keywords Museums, Consumer behaviour, Qualitative techniques, Services marketing

Abstract Since the advent of the contract culture, the reduction in museum budgets, and theimplementation of performance measures based on customer satisfaction management,museums have faced increasing pressure to attract wider audiences. This requires anunderstanding of visitor expectations, and experiences, of visiting a museum. However, for themost part, public museums have concentrated their research efforts into obtaining statistical datawhich measure through-put and provide demographic profiles, ignoring in the process the natureof the experience itself. This paper looks at research derived primarily from academics working inthe field of visitor studies. It outlines three approaches; the social, the cognitive, and theenvironmental perspective, which have been applied to studies of museum visitor behaviour. Thepaper then presents the findings from an observational study of visitors to a city museum. Thesefindings are recast in the light of the three approaches described, in order to offer an integratedframework of customer behaviour which has implications for the management of the serviceencounter in museums.

IntroductionThe nature and characteristics of services pose different challenges formanagers, given that a service is an act, a process, and a performance (Gilmore,1996). As with many services, the museum product is delivered in a physicalenvironment or site which encompasses the land or building area, shape,lighting, means of orientating the visitor, queues, waiting, crowding, andmethods of stimulating interest and engagement (Shostack, 1985; Bateson,1991; Goulding, 1999). The service encounter is the service as seen from thecustomer's point of view and is normally defined as the period of time duringwhich the customer directly interacts with a service (Shostack, 1985). In thecase of museums, the effectiveness of communicating historical information,the essential product, relies on the ability to construct images, conveyinformation, and engage the visitor, through either social exchange or moretraditional textual and visual methods (Goulding, 1999). Consequently, there isgeneral agreement that what we term the delivery of a service might just aseasily be described as the selling of an experience (Bateson, 1991). In thepresent climate, the need to understand the nature of the museum experiencehas never been greater. Since the late, 1980s there has been increasing pressureon museums to widen their appeal in order to attract larger and more diverseaudiences. This may be seen primarily as a consequence of the contract culture,the reduction in museums' budgets, and the implementation of performancemeasures based on customer satisfaction management (Hooper-Greenhill,1996):

The research register for this journal is available athttp://www.mcbup.com/research_registers/mkt.asp

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available athttp://www.emerald-library.com

EuropeanJournal ofMarketing34,3/4

262

At a general level power is shifting from the curator as guardian of standards and values, to thevalues and standards of the consumer . . .These days central and local government stress theneeds of the `̀ consumer'', the `̀ customer'' the `̀ citizen'', the `̀ user'' (Hooper-Greenhill, 1996, p. 180).

Nonetheless, outside of academic circles, there is little research that takes accountof the actions and voices of the visitors to museums themselves. What museumcurators and related official bodies are good at is collecting numbers. However,much of this research has been criticised for its lack of attempt to integrate theresults into a coherent framework (Falk et al., 1985; Moscardo, 1996), and forfailing to use the results to advance an overall understanding of the nature of thevisit (Merriman, 1989; Stevens, 1989; Stapp, 1990). Visitors bring a multiplicity ofinterpretations to the reading of displays and the fact that artefacts may besubject to multiple interpretation has important implications for the waymuseums think about and present themselves (Smith, 1989; Urry, 1990; Squire,1994). Much of the work on museums as service providers has tended toconcentrate predominantly on museums as institutions of culture which areprimarily ideological in what they choose to present (Cleere, 1989; Simpson, 1993;Byrne, 1991; Thomas, 1991; Hudson, 1987; Jenkins, 1991). Specific examplesinclude issues such as the portrayal of gender (Proesler, 1990; Porter, 1988), race(Garrison, 1990; Merriman, 1995), and social class (Bennett, 1988; West, 1988).Merriman (1991) suggests that museums should act as `̀ enablers'' to the past, andwhat they offer should be intellectually accessible and culturally relevant to theiraudience, despite social or ethnic background. As it stands, the lack ofrepresentation of relevant histories may act as barriers which serve to exclude,rather than include, vast numbers of the population (Bourdieu, 1968, 1984).

Museums, particularly in the public sector, have been slow to catch on to theidea of customer orientation, regardless of growing pressure to become morecompetitive and self-reliant (Cossons, 1989; Broadhurst, 1989; Hewison, 1991;Malcolm-Davies, 1990; Perot, 1993). This paper therefore looks largely at thework of academics who have conducted research into the nature of the on-siteexperience. It outlines a number of theories relating to the social, psychological,and environmental aspects of the visit, before presenting a case study, based onobservations of visitor behaviour at an orthodox museum. The paper concludesby offering a number of interrelated factors which have implications for themanagement of customer service in museums.

Social approaches to understanding the visitorThe social approach to museum visitor behaviour requires that consumption isperceived as meaningful behaviour on the part of an individual in a socialcontext. For the researcher, it is the interaction between individual processes andthe social situation which is of prime importance when considering the serviceencounter and the nature of the experience. Kelly (1985) contextualises the `̀ idealself'' concept within the arena of group dynamics in his proposition that many ofthe influences on behaviour will derive from primary or secondary groups towhich people belong. He provides the example of the museum visit as a newstatus symbol which serves to separate the cultured `̀us'' from the uncultured

The museumenvironment

263

`̀ them''. He further contends that many visitors are motivated to attain a state ofhaving been to a museum, rather then to enjoy `̀being there''. McManus (1989) inher research into communications with, and between, visitors to the BritishMuseum, concluded that visitors in groups attend to museum communicationsas a social unit. The social unit focuses on an exhibition, selectively activatingcontributions from the text to build conversations. In such cases group pressuresare given priority over more individually based satisfactions. However, whilethere is evidence that groups do play a part in the experience for some, neitherKelly's (1985) nor McManus's (1989) findings go any way to explain thebehaviour of the lone visitor who actively seeks out the solitude of a museum inorder to soak up the atmosphere in isolation.

Cognitive approaches to understanding visitor behaviourScreven (1986) argues that an understanding of consumer motivations is oneessential factor in successful museum management and proceeds to classifymotivations as intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsic motivations, in this context,centre on the usefulness of the visit, the coherence of context, timeliness,personal meaning, the opportunity to interact, and the degree of challengepresented to the participant. Extrinsic motivations include feedback andrewards such as tokens or privileges for achievement. He further makes thepoint that fun must be part of the experience. Nonetheless, a cursory glance atthe writings of Hewison (1987, 1989), Fowler (1992), Carr (1991), and Waterson(1989) raises questions about the emphasis on fun. A common theme runningthrough the writings of these scholars is a plea for a less intrusive, moreimaginative form of interpretation to replace the increasing tendency towards`̀ amusement'' park museums with their stress on `̀ fun'' and entertainment at theexpense of mental engagement.

A further area for investigation is the level of involvement and participationbetween visitors and exhibits. Eason and Linn (1976) and Boisvert and Slez(1995) propose that much of the research in museums centres on theeffectiveness of participatory exhibits. However, Blud (1990) argues that mostmuseums actually ignore the nature of the visit by concentrating too much onthe effectiveness of the exhibit. Moscardo (1996) looks to the discipline ofpsychology, particularly social cognition to provide a theoretical framework.His findings are based on the work of Langer and Newman (1987) whodeveloped the `̀ mindfulness''/`̀ mindlessness'' distinction. Mindfulness is theproduct of novelty, surprise, variety, and situations that require effort on thepart of the individual. Mindlessness, on the other hand, is a result of overfamiliarity, or exposure to stimuli which is not perceived as personally relevant(Langer and Newman, 1987). Uzzell (1989) and Moscardo (1996) propose thatinterpretation should produce mindful visitors who are active, interested andcapable of questioning and reassessing the situation. Both Uzzell (1989) andMoscardo's (1996) conclusions focus on the significance of interaction andcontrol in the experience, the need for variety, and the degree of cognitiveorientation. However, while both social and psychological approaches have

EuropeanJournal ofMarketing34,3/4

264

merit and offer insights which further our understanding of the nature of theexperience, in isolation the picture remains partial. A third focus for analysis isthe environmental perspective.

The museum environment and the spatial interaction perspectiveRegardless of the make-up of the individual, their motivations and hoped-forexperiences, it is crucial to acknowledge that all behaviour takes place within aparticular setting. According to Shields (1992), modern consumption sites arecharacterised by a new spatial form which is a synthesis of leisure andconsumption. Langman (1992) proposes that if the Gothic cathedral was thesymbolic structure of the feudal era, and the factory of the industrial, the distinctsites of today are cultural sites or theme parks. Delaney (1992) uses the exampleof the Canadian Museum of Civilisation to illustrate the spatial/interactionrelationship. The museum, she suggests, offers the experience of `̀ Infotainment'',with the `̀ History Hall'' designed to function as a space for the leisurelyconsumption of Canadian history and culture. Space is formed largely throughsocial action, and space controls the activities that take place within it, and howthe objects are understood (Zukin, 1991; Delaney, 1992). However, while:

much progress has been made in designing the physical and aesthetic aspects of exhibitionspaces, how the physical design affects the motivational, perceptual, affective, and learningpotentials of unguided visitors in the informal museum environment is less well understoodby museum and exhibit planners (Screven, 1986, p. 109).

Research objectivesThe objectives behind the field research were to identify the nature of thevisitor experience at a city museum, the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery,in order to offer a theoretical and empirically integrated analysis which couldassist in visitor and interpretation management. Falk et al. (1985) contend thatthere are three basic frameworks which may be applied to the study of museumvisitor behaviour. These include:

(1) An exhibit perspective which maintains that the nature of the exhibit isthe dominant motivator and as such is subject to manipulation andcontrol through the degree of participation versus passivity, content,attractiveness and intensity of illumination.

(2) The visitor perspective: here the view is that visitors come to a museumwith an agenda and prior knowledge. The metaphor of the visitor as ashopper is most commonly used with this approach, but the idea ofestablishing any form of prediction is based on an understanding of the`̀ goods'' on the `̀ shopping list'' and it is one which most museumprofessionals have tended to ignore.

(3) The `̀ setting'' perspective: this is an holistic view which requires theresearcher to remain open to the influences of social, psychological andenvironmental factors. From this perspective the museum is perceived asa `̀behaviour'' setting, rather than just a stage for education or fun. It is

The museumenvironment

265

part of the new movement within cultural studies into audience researchwhich draws on ethnographic methods. Similarly, there is growingrecognition among marketing scholars that there is a greater need forvisitor orientation (McLean, 1993; Prentice, 1996) and experientialsegmentation (Davies, 1996). Accordingly, uses and gratification studiesalone are rejected because they remain at the level of individualpsychology, ignoring other forces that shape responses (Hooper-Greenhill,1996). It is this approach that formed the basis of the research discussed inthis paper.

Method and means of data collectionThe main method of enquiry was observation of on-site behaviour at theBirmingham Museum and Art Gallery. The museum is fairly typical of manycity museums in terms of size, audience composition, and methods ofinterpreting the past. It offers a mix of static, and interactive forms ofrepresentation through audio visual display, computer games and virtual realityconstructions. Data collection took the form of non-intrusive observation. Thiswas based on the rationale that sometimes actions speak louder than words.According to Grove and Fisk (1992), observational methods refer to datagathering techniques that focus on experience by providing real-worldimpressions in authentic surroundings. However, in line with most writers on thesubject, Adler and Adler (1994) suggest that the hallmark of observation is itsnon-intrusive nature which minimises any interference in the behaviour of thoseobserved, neither manipulating nor stimulating them. Observation of behaviouralso locates the researcher within the context under investigation, a point whichBelk et al. (1989, p. 1) propose leads to revelatory incidents, or:

highly charged encounters suffused with meaning. Because these incidences are directlyexperienced by the researcher, the significance of the phenomenon is more fully appreciated.

It is well recognised that we all use observational techniques as part ofeveryday life. They are a way of constructing meaning and attributing sense tointeractions and actions, but as human beings, we do not, or cannot internalisethe whole range of activities occurring in the social world around us (Adler andAdler, 1994; Grove and Fisk, 1992). This selectivity has filtered through as onecriticism of the method. Others documented by Adler and Adler (1994) includequestions of validity. For example, there are no informant's quotes to confirmfindings, and there are issues of reliability such as the degree of chanceoccurrences versus real behaviour. In order to overcome some of thesefundamental problems they suggest the use of multiple observations, thesearch for negative cases to enhance validity, and the repetition of observationsacross various conditions to strengthen reliability.

ProcessBearing in mind questions regarding the validity of observation as a method, theresearch progressed through a series of stages in order to avoid superficial

EuropeanJournal ofMarketing34,3/4

266

analysis. According to Atkinson and Hammersley (1994, p. 249), `̀ all socialresearch is a form of participant observation because we cannot study the socialworld without being part of it''. Consequently, the first stage involvedfamiliarisation with the resource itself, to experience the museum from theperspective of a visitor, and then to reflect on the experience as it developed fromthe entrance, through the various exhibition halls, through to the exit. Thesereflections were written up and combined with the literature on museum visitingin order to construct an observation sheet which incorporated the followingfactors:

. General description of visitor characteristics such as age, sex, and thenumber of visitors in the party.

. Cultural and personal significance of interpretation at a particularexhibition as indicated by comments, reveries, and conversations.

. Social interaction and conversation building using the exhibit asstimulus.

. Individual contemplation and engagement with the resource.

. Exhibit response ± time spent, involvement, concentration.

. Environmental factors such as sense of orientation, lighting andcrowding levels.

These indicators were categorised under separate headings and were notedeither positively or negatively according to such factors as body language,frustration, boredom, comments made, and the duration of stay. In addition tothe observation sheet, memos were written to describe particularly valuableobservations, and also to provide a sense of reorientation (Glaser and Strauss,1967). Two separate weeks were spent at the museum altogether. The firstweek allowed time to get to know the museum, operationalise the observationsheet, collect data and interpret the findings. Once a provisional framework hadbeen developed, a further week was spent at the museum in order to confirmthese findings and also to check for negative cases. In total 112 observationsheets were completed, ranging in the amount of detail, depending on theduration of the stay of a particular visitor, or party of visitors. The data werethen subjected to thematic analysis whereby recurring actions among similarindividuals or groups became the basis for the final interpretation of behaviour.

The Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery: a resource analysisAs stated, the location for the research was the Birmingham Museum and ArtGallery, a museum associated with the more orthodox methods of preservingand displaying historical artefacts. However, while the museum receives publicfunding, cuts in budgets and management policy changes have increasedfinancial pressures and resulted in efforts to attract a wider cross-section of thecommunity, particularly to visiting exhibitions which require admissioncharges. At the time of writing, the museum and art gallery were attracting

The museumenvironment

267

approximately one million visitors per annum, with the art gallery drawing600,000 and the museum 400,000. Nevertheless, it is recognised that visitorpatterns fluctuate depending on the nature of the exhibitions offered at anyparticular time (Michael Diamond, Deputy Director).

Researcher observations of the museumThe starting point for analysis, naturally enough, concerned the entrance to themuseum on Edmund Street which was badly signed. Once inside, the receptionwas stark and offered very little information regarding current displays. Aboard was situated to the left of the entrance which was supposed to serve as amap of levels and rooms, but proved to be complicated and confusing, resultingin chanced exploration rather than a planned route. To begin with, this resultedin both physical and mental disorientation. The museum is large and offers avariety of exhibits ranging from a history of the city from medieval times to thepresent day, to a hall displaying artefacts and stories from ancient Egypt. Itincludes exhibitions of classical archaeology, a history of gems, an exhibitiondedicated to the history of the city, displays of clothes, machinery, naturalhistory, and the fairly recent addition of an exhibition entitled `̀ A meetingground of cultures''. Throughout the museum there is little in the way ofsigning, or detail regarding the nature of interpretation in each hall.Exhibitions also vary in terms of their setting with regard to size, space, shapeand lighting. Interpretation methods throughout are mixed with some exhibitspresented in totally static form with only text to illuminate their history, whileothers comprise interactive and visual means of representing a particularhistory. Observations of both the physical environment and the nature of theexhibits on offer provided the foundation for some early insights which weresubsequently verified or negated by further observations of behaviour.

Observation of behaviourWhile the actions and reactions of visitors to the museum were noted across awide range of exhibitions, it is impossible to detail all cases in this paper.Therefore the following represents a summary of findings from observations attwo very distinct exhibitions, `̀ A meeting ground of cultures'' and `̀ TheBirmingham exhibition''. These were chosen due to the fact that the firstrepresents a new approach to exhibit management in terms of content andinteractive procedures, while the second is a fairly traditional exhibition,relying on the visitor to manoeuvre the route in order to piece together thejigsaw of the history of Birmingham.

Case study one: `̀ A meeting ground of cultures''This exhibition has been acclaimed as an innovative project, aimed atbroadening appeal to a wider range of ethnic and social groups. Ethnicminorities have traditionally been almost invisible in museum visitor statistics(Merriman, 1995), therefore the objective was to incorporate significant imageswhich would have relevance in a multicultural society. The exhibition consists

EuropeanJournal ofMarketing34,3/4

268

of a range of artefacts and symbols which define and demonstrate the nature ofbeliefs, values, customs and art from around the world. Interpretationincorporates videos, music, and objects, which stress the importance of ethnicidentity and is thought provoking in its inclusion and representation of culturalsymbols. By way of illustration, there is a display of masks from cultures asdiverse as Islam, African tribal, to terrorist paraphernalia such as theBalaclava. These are analysed as much (in text) for their symbolic meanings ofpower, control, manipulation and intimidation, as for the craftsmanship behindtheir creation. In addition to such displays with their written commentary, theexhibition also contains interactive equipment which requires thought andconcentration on the part of the visitor. However, whist the display appeared,on face value, to be radical and progressive, observations revealed that theintended audience, primarily Asian and Afro-Caribbean, were the leastinterested in the visit.

It would seem that cultural identification is not necessarily attached to thesame objects or artefacts, or experienced in the same manner universally. Forexample, a group of Asian women visiting the museum spent very little time atthis particular exhibition, preferring to move through to the section that housedthe precious gems and jewellery. These probably held greater culturalsignificance and interest, given the emphasis on body adornment and jewelleryas a status symbol common to this particular culture. This indicates the needfor a deeper exploration of culture, identity and meaning, as demonstrated byMerriman (1995) in the `̀ Peopling of London'' project, an experiment undertakenby the London Museum aimed at making the museum more accessible andapplicable to a much wider audience. This involved researchers taking to thestreets of areas with high ethnic minority populations to find out abouttraditions, rituals, food, dance, and means of inculcating a sense of history. Theend result was a very successful exhibition which included participation in theconstruction of displays by the visitors themselves. However, while `̀ A meetingground of cultures'' may not enjoy the same impact as the London Museumproject, in terms of engagement and holding power, the display still provedmore popular than the majority of exhibits for both ethnic groups and youngervisitors, who again are a statistical minority. The nature of interpretation,being multifaceted, managed to stimulate both individuals and groups.Interactive computer games encouraged the individual to partake in mindful,exploratory behaviour, while static displays accompanied by textualinformation allowed for `̀ inner'' directed contemplation.

Case study two: `̀ The Birmingham Exhibition''This exhibition was located toward the rear of the museum and was poorlysigned which resulted in a low level of attendance. The objective was to tracethe history of the city from medieval times to the present day. Interpretationtook the form of paintings, objects, text, drawings, newspaper clippings,photographs and diaries. In brief, this exhibition, more than any other at themuseum, demonstrated a need for some form of precise and clear map or guide.

The museumenvironment

269

Those who found the room seemed to do so more by accident than purpose andtheir demeanour on entering displayed trepidation and unease, as if they wereunsure whether it was part of the public museum or an office. There wererelatively few visitors to this exhibition, and a number of those who looked inquickly left. Unlike `̀ A meeting ground of cultures'', which attracted a widecross-section of the public in terms of age and party composition, the majorityof visitors who took the time to investigate the Birmingham exhibit werepredominantly middle aged and elderly.

Once inside the exhibition, most visitors did not immediately grasp thesignificance or objective of the display or which way to follow it. The lightingwas dim and the setting could be described as dreary and unwelcoming.Those who chose to stay skimmed over the parts that were not of particularinterest to them, quickly moving on to other sections. These sections weremainly those which incorporated a variety of objects, photographs andnewspaper accounts. Such displays included the later editions and accountsof social and economic conditions of the late nineteenth century in particular.Interpretation included photographs, ranging from back-to-back houses,alleyways, pictures of trams, extracts from documents detailing policies oneducation, newspaper clippings about crime and punishment and medicalreports which debated conditions such as rickets and head lice. The oldervisitors first concentrated on the material individually, and then collectivelydiscussed the settings, spoke about the nit nurse, laughed together andreminisced. The photographs were perceived as being `̀ real'', people hadactually lived through and endured these conditions and the documentedevidence served to verify the authenticity of the experience (Goulding,forthcoming). On the other hand, paintings of local dignitaries and landedgentry were perceived as alien and largely ignored, giving credence to thenotion that the greater the cultural and even personal identification withhistorical representations, the greater the interest and staying power(Goulding and Domic, 1999). A further detracting factor was the lack ofcontinuity or `̀ theme'' at such displays. This discontinuity only served toconfuse and create disinterest. There was little to connect the strands of theseartefacts to the history of the period and, as such, milestones and eventsremained fragmented and unsupported by stimulating methods ofpresentation.

While the two exhibitions discussed here represent completely differentstories, settings and methods of interpretation, there remain common themesacross the behaviour of visitors which can be basically divided into socio-cultural and psychological determinants of the experience. Social factorsinfluencing the experience:

. Cultural identification.

. Continuity of theme and story.

. Conversation and story building from evaluation of stimulus.

. Social interaction.

EuropeanJournal ofMarketing34,3/4

270

Cognitive factors influencing the experience:

. The creation of mindful activity.

. Involvement and engagement.

. Inner reflection and imagination.

. Variation of stimulus to create a meaningful `̀ whole''.

. Perceived authenticity.

All of the above factors indicate the need to engage the visitor by providingstimulating material which can be processed in a meaningful way (Moscardo,1996; Langer and Newman, 1987; Uzzell, 1989). However, interpreters have afine balancing act to perfect if the experience is to be appreciated by all. While itis only natural that some visitors will come to a museum seeking solitude andisolation, while others will use the museum as a stage for social interaction(Kelly, 1985; McManus, 1989; Blud, 1990), there are a number of commonfactors which appear to be integral to sustaining interest. Essentially, thesecentre on the ability to engage the visitor. The Birmingham Exhibitionprovides an example of a static display which lost the majority of its visitorsvery early. The layout was important, but the stories did little to stimulate theimagination, or raise questions. It was only the recent past which activatedconversation, fundamentally, because it was depicted in such a manner as toenable the visitor to draw parallels with life in contemporary society. Themeeting ground of cultures engaged the visitor in a different way, throughinteractive computerised equipment which appealed more to the youngergenerations. Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton (1981, p. 46) propose that:

the young receive meaningful information from interacting with objects that are appropriateto their stage in life as defined in this culture: These are different objects and thereforedifferent selves, from those that their parents and grandparents develop.

This was similar to the way in which the various ages related to the past, theychose mediums which reflected their own age culture. These in turn dictatedthe degree of engagement on the part of the visitor. Csikszentmihalyi (1992)provides focus for such assertions in his analysis of what he terms `̀ flow''. Thisconcerns conscious effort and the direction of psychic energy to produce afeeling of wellbeing. A flow experience is autotelic (an end in itself) and iscongruent with goals which involve absorption in an activity. This demandsreal engagement and real involvement, and is not experienced through passiveactivity. Nevertheless, regardless of the quality of display, there is one furtherfactor which can either enhance the experience, or detract from it at a very earlystage resulting in frustration and anxiety, and that is the nature of the physicalenvironment.

Findings regarding visitor behaviour and the environmentMany services are delivered in physical environments or sites created by theservice firm (Bateson, 1991). The works of Shields (1992), Zukin (1991),

The museumenvironment

271

Langman (1992) and Delaney (1992) provide an interesting perspective on thespatial/interaction relationship between the visitor and the museumenvironment. However, rather than just focusing on the nature of behaviourwithin certain sanctioned areas, the journey through the museum can revealareas for improvement. It is widely accepted within the discipline ofenvironmental psychology, a discipline which is currently influencingmarketers within the field of services marketing (Donovan and Rossiter, 1991),that the psychological wellbeing of the individual will depend on a number ofcontrolled or uncontrolled factors. According to Rapaport (1982), environmentscommunicate meanings that trigger appropriate behaviours. Within thecontext of the museum these behaviours and experiences were analysedagainst the following three factors:

(1) Scene setting.

(2) Routing and mapping.

(3) Crowding density levels.

Scene settersScreven (1986) and Shackley (1999) suggest that the visitor needs to feel welloriented to enjoy the experience. In the case of the museum, this starts at theentrance in the form of a scene setter which serves to locate the individual interms of time and space. Lack of information at this stage may result indisorientation and confusion. At the museum there was a confusing array ofinformation which did little to orientate or direct the visitor. Furthermore, therewas little to hint at the range of exhibitions that were on offer, or what thevisitor might expect from them. This, in a number of cases, resulted in `̀ blind''exploration and increased anxiety. The following factors therefore emerged asimportant:

. A clear and coherent `̀ scene setter'' enhances understanding, orientationand satisfaction.

. Lack of such will be perceived as negative unless the individual isalready familiar with the environment.

. `̀ Scene setters'' need to be complemented with a coherent and precisemap of the museum.

Routeing and mappingSpatial knowledge acquisition involves internalising a large number of spatialrelationships, some of which will be more precise than others. Learning an arearequires the analysis of a series of perceptual and sensory impressions whichhave to be organised so as to identify common features. These features thenhave to be synthesised into a coherent component (Tolman, 1948). However,one's cognitive system has certain limitations such as memory capacity andinformation processing speed, which the structure of the physical environmentcan either help or hinder (Ryozo, 1991). These concepts are a progression of the

EuropeanJournal ofMarketing34,3/4

272

need for a scene setter as a means of orientation, but have greater implicationsfor the need to include both some form of map and clear signs or pointers forthe visitor to follow (Shackley, 1999). Consequently the following need to beconsidered when designing the service encounter:

. More than a complicated map situated at the entrance is required. Clearand concise images of the site, or leaflets, should be included which referthe visitor to key features and exhibits.

. Maps should be reinforced with signs and pointers to direct attentionand enhance information retention, the result of which would free theindividual to concentrate on the nature of the display.

. Maps and signing can act as a form of spatial control providing a clearlydirected route which may help to overcome congestion at certainpopular features.

Crowding and density levelsThe third aspect of the environment is that of crowding and density levels atcertain exhibitions and displays within the museum (Shackley, 1999). Thefundamental axiom underlying many social psychologist's conception ofcrowding is that crowding perceptions represent a negative psychologicalevaluation of physical density (Schmidt and Keating, 1979). According to Jamesand Burges (1984), such perceived crowding correlates with the visitor'sexposure to threatening behaviour resulting in physical movement constraint.This is in keeping with a major conceptual tradition known as `̀ socialinterference'' theory which attributes this negative evaluation to incompatibilitiesbetween a given level of physical density and the valued psychological goals orexpectations a person holds for an experience (Stokols, 1976). At the museum,certain exhibitions proved to be more popular than others. Therefore while somewere virtually empty, others were congested during particular times of the day.Consequently, there was evidence of varying reactions to crowding whichrevealed reactions similar to those proposed by Stokols (1976) with regard to thefollowing:

. Crowding increases awareness of other people.

. Spatial needs vary between individuals.

. Crowding modifies the behaviour of certain `̀ types''.

However, these factors did not apply universally, but varied in intensitydepending on the level of involvement on the part of the visitor.

Types and determinants of recreation crowding experience(Stokols, 1976)The following three items refer to different crowding types and theirdeterminants:

The museumenvironment

273

(1) Goal related: the degree of density compatibility of valued psychologicalgoals motivating a behaviour. Here the level of involvement andpersonal identification with the resource influenced the tolerance level ofthe individual in relation to crowding density. Most people foundcrowding a negative factor which impinged on behaviour and impactedon the experience. Such symptoms included physical discomfort andirritability. However, those that were deeply involved had the ability tofilter out the presence of others to such a degree that the level ofimmersion in the experience increased `̀ tolerance''.

(2) Behavioural crowding: the amount of exposure to threatening orobjectionable behaviour (noise, rowdiness, litter). At the museum, thepresence of schoolchildren at times resulted in crowding, noise, and theviolation of distance norms (Hall, 1959, 1966; Rustemli, 1992). This wasparticularly marked in popular exhibits such as `̀ A meeting ground ofcultures''. In such cases it was the level of noise, coupled with queuesand high density crowding that produced frustration (Katz et al., 1991;Evans and Lapore, 1992) and feelings of what Shackley (1999) describesas social injustice, or lack of satisfaction as a result of conflict betweenexpectations and experience.

(3) Physical crowding: the amount of space required to pursue an activity inan unconstrained manner. The layout and design of an exhibition hallcan encourage the length of stay. At the museum, the exhibition hallswere spacious and airy and could accommodate greater numberswithout creating anxiety. Those exhibitions that were not too heavilyattended also incorporated seating areas, which again encouraged theindividual to pause and contemplate what was on offer. As such thecombination of expectations, layout, and design can serve to eitherenhance or detract from the visit. In effect the design of the environmentcan go even further, by acting as a means of crowd and consequentbehaviour control.

By way of a summary of environmental conditions and their impact on theexperience, it must be noted that, while such factors as social, cultural, andmental engagement are integral aspects of the visit, the amount of informationprovided at the start of the visit, the provision of directions, clear signing andcrowding density will also either contribute towards an enjoyable, informativeexperience or conversely result in feelings of disorientation, frustration andpsychological anxiety.

ConclusionThe findings of this research relate broadly to Shostack's (1985) definition of aholistic approach to service marketing. In the context of the city museum, it ispossible to argue that the service experience is mediated by a number of socio-cultural, cognitive, psychological orientators, and physical and environmental

EuropeanJournal ofMarketing34,3/4

274

conditions, all of which need to be seen as interrelated if a quality experience isto be provided. These may be summarised as:

Socio-cultural

. Cultural identification.

. Continuity of theme and story.

. Conversation and story building from evaluation of stimulus.

. Variation of stimulus.

. Social interaction.

Cognitive

. The creation of mindful activity.

. Involvement and engagement.

. Inner reflection and imagination.

. Variation of stimulus to create a meaningful whole.

. Perceived authenticity.

Psychological orientation

. Scene setters.

. Routeing and mapping.

Physical and environmental

. Crowding.

. Seats.

. Noise.

It is important to realise that museums can be social settings and thatinterpretation should be designed to maximise engagement while at the sametime allowing for the imagination to creatively and intelligently piece togetherthe pieces of a particular history. The quality of the customer service encounteris therefore a question of getting the right balance between intrusion andimagination. Drawing on the Gestaltian perspective that to dissect is to distort,it needs to be acknowledged that as individuals we do not like fragmentedpieces of information; we seek out complete pictures, and therefore a sense ofcontinuity and natural progression is a further feature which needs to beconsidered carefully when designing exhibit displays. Finally, the visitor needsto feel comfortable. It is essential, therefore, not to let the experience start withfrustration, anxiety and disorientation. Clear and easy to follow maps willallow the visitor to focus attention on the exhibit and enable the planning of aparticular route. Seats and areas for contemplation will also allow individualsto absorb information and reflect on the object of their gaze.

The museumenvironment

275

Limitations of the research and future directionsObservations, by their nature, are largely descriptive. Without the words ofinformants it is impossible to delve further into the nature of motivationsbehind the visit, or subconscious experiences. Therefore much of the analysisrelies on common-sense interpretation and insight which is recast and enrichedby existing theory. However, the aim of this paper was to bring together a bodyof work from a cross-disciplinary perspective in order to offer a more integratedunderstanding of the nature of the visit, an approach which is gainingpopularity in the fields of both service marketing and museum studies, as notedby Hooper-Greenhill (1996, p. 187):

There are many challenges for museums in defining a way forward for the twenty-firstcentury. Perhaps one of the most important things to do is to begin to learn what is happeningin other areas of cultural politics and to break down the historic isolation of the museum,especially in the area of theory. The struggles over the development of new concepts, newideas, and new practices that are necessary in the reinvention of the museum as an institutethat both understands its own specific poetics, but is also able to articulate these in a range ofpolitical contexts, might well become less difficult with companions who are workingthrough the same struggles in different intellectual fields.

Future research into the museum experience therefore may benefit from theincorporation of ideas from complementary disciplines such as cultural studies,history, and politics, in addition to sociological and psychological theory whichhas informed marketing thinking for many years. Additionally, to take theresearch further, a comparison of visitor behaviour at museums located indifferent cities, using other means of data collection, such as in-depthinterviews and videotapes, would serve to triangulate, authenticate, and allowfor transposability of the findings.

References

Adler, P.A. and Adler, P. (1994), `̀ Observational techniques'', in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S.(Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Atkinson, P. and Hammersley, M. (1994), `̀ Ethnography and participant observation'', in Guba,G. and Lincoln, Y. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Bateson, J. (1991), Managing Services Marketing, 2nd ed., Dryden Press, Forth Worth, TX.

Belk, R.W., Wallendorf, M. and Sherry, J.F. (1989), `̀ The sacred and the profane in consumerbehaviour: theodicy on the Odyssey'', Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16, June, pp. 1-37.

Bennett, T. (1988), `̀ Museums and the people'', in Lumley, R. (Ed.), The Museum Time Machine,Routledge, London.

Blud, L.M. (1990), `̀ Social interaction and learning among family groups visiting a museum'',Museum Management and Curatorship, Vol. 9, pp. 43-51.

Boisvert, D. and Slez, D. (1995), `̀ The relationship between exhibit characteristics and learningassociated behaviours in a science museum'', Science Education, Vol. 79 No. 5, pp. 503-18.

Bourdieu, P. (1968), `̀ Outline of a sociological theory of art perception'', International SocialScience Journal, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 589-613.

Bourdieu, P. (1984), Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, Routledge & KeganPaul, London.

EuropeanJournal ofMarketing34,3/4

276

Broadhurst, R. (1989), `̀ The search for new funds'', in Uzzell, D. (Ed.), Heritage Interpretation,Volume 2, Belhaven Press, London.

Byrne, D. (1991), `̀ Western hegemony in archaeological management'', History and Archaeology,Vol. 5, pp. 269-76.

Carr, J. (1991), `̀ Whose heritage is it anyway?'', in Uzzell, D. (Ed.), Interpretation Newsletter: TheSociety for the Interpretation of Britain's Heritage, March.

Cleere, H. (1989), Introduction to the Rationale of Archaeological, Heritage Management in theModern World, Unwin Hyman, London.

Cossons, N. (1989), `̀ Trends in supplying the market: heritage, trend and tribulations'', TourismManagement, September.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1992), Flow: The Psychology of Happiness, Rider Press, London.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. and Rochberg-Halton, E. (1981), The Meaning of Things, Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge.

Davies, A. (1996), `̀ Experiential segmentation for latent and actual museum demand'', Proceedingsof the 31st Academy of Marketing Conference, Manchester Metropolitan University, 8-10July.

Delaney, J. (1992), `̀ Ritual space in the Canadian museum of civilisation'', in Shields, R. (Ed.),Lifestyle Shopping, Routledge, London.

Donovan, R. and Rossiter, J. (1991), `̀ Store atmosphere: an environmental psychology approach'',in Bateson, J. (Ed.), Managing Services Marketing, 2nd ed., Dryden Press, Fort Worth, TX.

Eason, L.P. and Linn, M.C. (1976), `̀ Evaluation of the effectiveness of participatory exhibits'',Curator, Vol. 19, pp. 45-62.

Evans, G. and Lepore, S. (1992), `̀ Conceptual and analytical issues in crowding research'', Journalof Environmental Psychology, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 163-73.

Falk, J.H., Koran, J.J., Dierking, L.D. and Dreblow, L. (1985), `̀ Predicting visitor behaviour'',Curator, Vol. 28, pp. 249-57.

Fowler, P. (1992), The Past in Contemporary Society: Then and Now, Routledge, London.

Garrison, L. (1990), `̀ The black industrial past in Britain'', in Shore, P. and MacKenzie, R. (Eds),The Excluded Past: Archaeology in Education, Unwin Hyman, London.

Gilmore, A. (1996), `̀ Services marketing research: the use of qualitative methods'', Proceedings ofthe Marketing Education Group Conference, Strathclyde University, July.

Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for QualitativeResearch, Aldine, Chicago, IL.

Goulding, C. (1999), `̀ Interpretation and presentation'', in Leask, A. and Yeoman, I. (Eds), HeritageVisitor Attractions: An Operations Management Perspective, Cassell, London.

Goulding, C. (2000), `̀ The commodification of the past, postmodern pastiche, and the search forauthentic experiences at contemporary heritage sites'', Special issue, `̀ Understandingcustomers: developments in theory and practice'', European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35Nos 5/6.

Goulding, C. and Domic, D. (1999), `̀ Consuming the past in a `new' old country: the remaking ofhistory and the consumption of heritage in the former Yugoslavia'', Proceedings of theAcademy of Marketing Conference, Stirling University, 8-10 July.

Grove, S.J. and Fisk, R.P. (1992), `̀ Observational data collection for services marketing: anoverview'', Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 217-24.

Hall, E. (1959), The Silent Language, Doubleday, New York, NY.

Hall, E. (1966), The Hidden Dimension, Doubleday, New York, NY.

Hewison, R. (1987), The Heritage Industry: Britain in a Climate of Decline, Methuen, London.

The museumenvironment

277

Hewison, R. (1989), `̀ Heritage: an interpretation'', in Uzzell, D. (Ed.), Heritage InterpretationVolume 1, Belhaven Press, London.

Hewison, R. (1991), `̀ Commerce and culture'', in Boylan, P. (Ed.), Museums 2000, Routledge,London.

Hooper-Greenhill, E. (1996), `̀ Museums, exhibitions, and communities: cultural politics'', Semiotica,Vol. 108 No. 1, pp. 177-87.

Hudson, K. (1987), Museums of Influence, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

James, H. and Burges, G. (1984), `̀ Crowding perception determinants at intensively developedoutdoor recreation sites'', Leisure Sciences, Vol. 6, pp. 167-86.

Jenkins, K. (1991), Re-thinking History, Routledge, London.

Katz, K., Larson, B. and Larson, M. (1991), `̀ Prescription for the waiting in line blues'', in Bateson,J. (Ed.), Managing Services Marketing, 2nd ed., Dryden Press, Fort Worth, TX.

Kelly, R. (1985), `̀ Museums as status symbols 2: obtaining a state of having been there,'', in Belk,R. (Ed.), Advances in Non-Profit Marketing, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.

Langer, E. and Newman, H. (1987), `̀ The prevention of mindlessness'', Journal of Personality andSocial Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 5, pp. 295-9.

Langman, L. (1992), `̀ Neon cages: shopping for subjectivity'', in Shields, R. (Ed.), Lifestyle Shopping,Routledge, London.

McLean, F.C. (1993), `̀ Marketing in museums: a contextual analysis'', Museum Management andCuratorship, Vol. 12, pp. 367-80.

McManus, P. (1989), `̀ What people say and how they think in a science museum'', in Uzzell, D.(Ed.), Heritage Interpretation Volume 1, Belhaven Press, London.

Malcolm-Davies, J. (1990), `̀ Shopping for sponsors'', Museums Journal, Vol. 21.

Merriman, N. (1989), `̀ The social basis of museum and heritage visiting'', in Pearce, S. (Ed.),Museum Studies in Material Culture, Leicester University Press, London.

Merriman, N. (1991), Beyond the Glass Case: The Past, the Heritage and the Public in Britain,Leicester University Press, London.

Merriman, N. (1995), `̀ Hidden history: the Peopling of London project'', Museum International,Vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 12-16.

Moscardo, G. (1996), `̀ Mindful visitors: heritage and tourism'', Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 23No. 2, pp. 376-97.

Perot, P. (1993), `̀ Funding sponsorship and corporate support'', in Boylan, P. (Ed.), Museums2000, Routledge, London.

Porter, G. (1988), `̀ Putting your house in order: representations of women and domestic life'', inLumley, R. (Ed.), The Museum Time Machine, Routledge, London.

Prentice, R.C. (1996), `̀ Tourism as experience, tourists as consumers: insight and enlightenment'',Queen Margaret College, Edinburgh.

Proesler, M. (1990), `̀ Museum masks and cultural change'', in Baker, F. and Thomas, J. (Eds),Writing the Past in the Present, University College, Lampeter.

Rapaport, A. (1982), The Meaning of the Built Environment, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.

Rustemli, A. (1992), `̀ Crowding effects of density and interpersonal distance'', Journal of SocialPsychology, Vol. 132 No. 1, pp. 51-8.

Ryozo, Y. (1991), `̀ A note on cognitive maps: an optimal spatial knowledge representation'',Journal of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 371-93.

Schmidt, D. and Keating, J. (1979), `̀ Human crowding and personal control: an integration of theresearch'', Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 86 No. 4, pp. 680-700.

EuropeanJournal ofMarketing34,3/4

278

Screven, C. (1986), `̀ Exhibitions and information centers: some principles and approaches'',Curator, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 109-37.

Shackley, M. (1999), `̀ Visitor management'', in Leaske, A. and Yeoman, I. (Eds), Heritage VisitorAttractions: An Operations Management Perspective, Cassells, London.

Shields, R. (Ed.) (1992), Lifestyle Shopping: The Subject of Consumption, Routledge, London.

Shostack, G. (1985), `̀ Planning the service encounter'', in Czepiel, J., Solomon, R. and Surprenant,C. (Eds), The Service Encounter, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.

Simpson, R. (1993), `̀ From healing to heritage'', Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 120, pp. 164-81.

Smith, C. (1989), Museums Artefacts and Meanings: The New Museology, Reaktion Books,London.

Squire, S. (1994), `̀ The cultural values of literary tourism'', Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 21,pp. 103-20.

Stapp, C.B. (1990), `̀ The `public', museum: a review of the literature'', Journal of MuseumEducation, Vol. 11, Fall, pp. 4-10.

Stevens, T. (1989), `̀ The visitor: who cares?'', in Uzzell, D. (Ed.), Heritage Interpretation Volume 1,Belhaven Press, London.

Stokols, S. (1976), `̀ The experience of crowding in primary and secondary environments'',Environment and Behaviour, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 49-86.

Thomas, J. (1991), `̀ Archaeology and the notion of ideology'', in Baker, F. and Thomas, J. (Eds),Writing the Past in the Present, University College, Lampeter.

Tolman, E. (1948), `̀ Cognitive maps in rats and men'', Psychological Review, Vol. 55 No. 4, pp. 189-208.

Urry, J. (1990), The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies, Sage, London.

Uzzell, D. (Ed.) (1989), Heritage Interpretation Volume 1, Belhaven Press, London.

Waterson, M. (1989), `̀ Opening doors on the past'', in Uzzell, D. (Ed.), Heritage InterpretationVolume 1, Belhaven Press, London.

West, B. (1988), `̀ The making of the English working past: a critical view of the Ironbridge GorgeMuseum'', in Lumley, R. (Ed.), The Museum Time Machine, Routledge, London.

Zukin, S. (1991), Landscapes of Power: From Detroit to Disney World, University of CaliforniaPress, Berkeley, CA.

[Search] [Advanced Search] [Submit Research] [Edit Research] [Help]

The Marketing Internet Research Register is delivered by MCB University Press inassociation with

The Chartered Institute of Marketing

'The marketing research register is a fabulous innovation. Easy-to-use and packed with detail, itis the ideal way to keep abreast of cutting edge themes and activity in your chosen area of

research. The more you know about what other people are researching in your field, the morerelevant and realistic your own thoughts and work in the subject will be. And there is no moreconvenient way of keeping up to date than through on-line access to a continuously updated

Internet-based register. This new facility offers 'one-stop' shopping for anyone interested in thelatest trends in marketing research and is an indispensable link with the wider research

community.'

Roger Bennett, IRR Editor

The Marketing Internet Research Register will report on current and recently completedmarketing research world-wide. It includes, but is not restricted to the following areas ofmarketing – marketing theory, marketing practice, marketing management, consumer

marketing, services marketing, business-to-business marketing, international marketing,financial services marketing, branding, market research and retailing.

Research may be linked to an academic course of study or project, be independent, ororganisation-based R&D. The Register seeks to maintain a sound balance between theory and

practice. Entries which report on applied research are particularly welcome.

No responsibility is accepted for the accuracy of information contained in the research presented within this Register. Theopinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of the Editors or the publisher.

Sponsors

http://www.mcbup.com/research_registers/mkt/sponsors.asp (1 of 2) [16/03/2000 10:36:34 AM]

© MCB University Press, UK and Reed Technology & Information Services, UK.

[Search] [Advanced Search] [Submit Research] [Edit Research] [Help]

Sponsors

http://www.mcbup.com/research_registers/mkt/sponsors.asp (2 of 2) [16/03/2000 10:36:34 AM]