Innovation and Teamwork: A Modest Ticketing Project Yields Accurate Attendance Figures
By David M. Tanner
The Premise
Accurately measuring attendance is a vital task for every museum. Beyond the basics of benchmarking and grant reporting, accurate attendance figures are essential for making informed, strategic decisions about finances, human resources, marketing and even focus areas or themes for collections, exhibitions and public programs. Gaining accurate attendance information can be a challenge for some museums. This case study reveals how one museum, the Indiana University Art Museum, creatively and effectively implemented a volunteer visitor services corps and free ticketing program to overcome its challenges related to gaining accurate attendance information.
Some Background
Since its establishment in 1941, the IU Art Museum has grown from a small teaching collection to an encyclopedic one with more than 35,000 objects representing nearly every art-producing culture throughout history, including ancient Egyptian, Greek, Roman and pre-Columbian antiquities, examples from Asia, the Arab nations, Africa, the Pacific islands and central and south America, as well as western art from the Medieval Christian era to the contemporary period. The museum is located on IU’s main campus, in Bloomington, Indiana, which is home to 36,000 students about ten months a year.
The museum is housed in an I.M. Pei & Partners building erected in the early 1980s specifically to showcase the museum’s collections. The museum has three permanent galleries and one gallery for temporary exhibitions. There are four floors containing the following: first floor—Western Art gallery, temporary exhibitions gallery, non-public spaces for security, collection storage and registrar’s functions; a workshop; and the main public entrance; mezzanine level—bathrooms and a second public entrance; second floor—Ancient and Asian gallery; an open lounge area leading to an outdoor sculpture terrace; non-public collection storage and laboratories for photography, framing and conservation; and a third public entrance; and third floor—the African, Oceanic & Pre-Columbian gallery with non-public collection storage and administrative offices. The museum is connected to the Hope School of Fine Arts building and the Fine Arts Library.
The IU Art Museum has a staff of approximately 60 individuals: 30 full-time and 30 part-time. Included in the safety and security division are a security manager, eight full-time guards/panel operators and six part-time guards.
The Challenges
Prior to 2004, the museum reported an average annual attendance of around 60,000 for the last several years. Looking at financial figures for the gift shop and accurate attendance records of just over 13,000 reported by the education department for group tours, primarily school tours, both K–12 and college, in the ’02–’03 fiscal year, it was apparent that attendance was not what it seemed.
On further investigation, it was revealed that the museum’s annual attendance was calculated by the total number of visitors going into each gallery on a daily basis. These numbers were being captured by security guards using hand-held counters, stationed in each gallery on a rotating basis. If a visitor went into more than one gallery, (s)he was being counted multiple times. Clearly, the count was skewed, but by how much? And, more importantly, how could the museum arrive at an accurate count given that it has:
- three public entrances on three separate floors,
- no visitor services staff and
- no financial resources available to correct the problem?
Add to these challenges the normal resistance to change inherent in most work environments, and a solution seemed improbable.
The Strategy
With the oversight of the new assistant director for administration, the museum formed a committee that included members from the security, curatorial, marketing, design and educational divisions to create a successful strategy. The team eventually created a four-by-five inch ticket. The ticket would be distributed free of charge to each visitor entering a gallery. The ticket was designed in full color, with each corner perforated for removal and, later, counting. The corners were color coded and labeled on each side to match a new wayfinding system that was concurrently developed. The color identified each gallery respectively: red for Western Art, gold for Special Exhibitions, yellow for the arts of Ancient and Asia and blue for Africa, Oceania and the Americas.
It was determined that the existing guard staff stationed in each gallery would be responsible for collecting ticket stubs as patrons entered the galleries. Guards also were given packets of tickets to distribute; however, since the guards’ main duty was security, the team proposed creating a volunteer visitor services corps to distribute the free tickets.
Implementation
It was decided to launch the new ticket with the start of the ’04 –’05 fiscal year on July 1, 2004. The committee also felt that the summer was a preferred time to begin, as the museum typically had reduced traffic at that time. This launch time would give the staff nearly two months to trouble-shoot any potential problems before the onrush of returning students and class visits in the fall.
Over the summer, the museum contacted academic staff, particularly in fine arts and other departments that frequently scheduled tours, to inform instructors and students of the new ticketing process. Signage was also prominently posted at entryways and in the elevator, directing people to the information desk or gallery guards and highlighting the fact that the ticket was free. The upcoming project was also discussed prior to its launch through important committees like the docents’, and an article was released in the museum’s newsletter.
Volunteers, mainly from the student population, were recruited and trained, along with security staff, on how to distribute and collect the ticket. This training also prepared the front-line staff for potential problems, as it initially was feared that many students would resist the change. Fortunately, the advance communication effort seemed to work. For those few individuals who complained about the new process, the staff explained the importance of getting accurate attendance counts for granting agencies and bench-marking.
The initial cost of the ticket order was $1,510 for 40,000 tickets on gummed pads of 50 each. Expenses for signage were minimal and were assumed by the graphics department. As no new staff was hired, the only human resources expense was the addition of recruitment, training and coordination duties for the volunteer visitor services corps, the responsibilities for which eventually fell to the external relations manager with assistance by the security manager and the assistant director for administration.
Results
Originally, the museum’s administration agreed to run the project for at least one full year. During this pilot year, the old method would continue so that a ratio would be calculated that could 1) be applied to previous years’ attendance counts to determine more accurate figures and 2) be used in future years if the implementation proved to create barriers to public access or was too challenging to manage without additional staff.
Fortunately, the ticket was well received by the public. In addition to effectively addressing the problem of accurately counting attendance, it also, surprisingly, addressed several other problems.
First, the ticket improved wayfinding, as it included information for each gallery as well as other visitor services amenities like the gift shop and restrooms. Because the gallery entrances on upper floors were somewhat hidden from view on the first floor, many visitors did not know the museum had more to see. The ticket also informed visitors, albeit briefly, of the content of each gallery.
Second, the ticket put a hard copy of the gallery rules in each visitor’s hand, thereby removing this unwelcome task from a guard or volunteer. No one likes being singled out for an indiscretion that (s)he may not even be aware of committing. Having a short list of the most important rules up front on the tickets informs the visitor in advance of the museum’s expectations.
In previous years, the museum had made attempts to create a corps of information desk volunteers, but those volunteers, with little to do, often left quickly. Adding the distribution of the ticket gave visitor services volunteers a meaningful purpose and was a third, hidden benefit of the ticketing project. Currently, the museum maintains a waiting list for openings in this popular volunteer division.
Fourth, although admission remains free, the “free” nature of the ticket implied a perceived value to the visitor, reinforcing the quality of the experience.
Fifth, the use of the ticket vastly improved the public’s perception of our security staff. As stated previously, prior to the implementation of the ticket, often a guard’s first engagement with a visitor was a negative experience—one in which a visitor was being informed of a rule (s)he had broken. By collecting the corner stub of the ticket, the first interaction becomes a friendly, positive one in which the guard greets the visitor and asks for and/or gives the visitor a ticket. This process also gives the guard a chance to address any potential problems before they might occur.
Finally and most importantly, the ticket provided accurate attendance information as the sixth benefit. Attachment A is the weekly sheet for the final week of the pilot year of the ticketing project. This sheet indicates that the museum’s actual annual total of daily gallery visitors was 31,732. Compared to the previous counter method, which reported 56,123, a ratio of 56.5 percent was calculated, which we applied to the attendance figures collected from previous years.
With accurate measures in place, and because of the additional and overwhelming benefits of the ticket, the museum’s administration approved the continuation of the project.
Conclusion
While the innovation and creativity of the ticket design made this project a success because it was financially affordable and easy to implement and eventually addressed several other public-access challenges, it also was the willingness of the museum’s staff, especially its security division, to address change with an open and enthusiastic mind that ensured a positive outcome for this endeavor.
David M. Tanner is associate director for administration, Indiana University Art Museum, Bloomington.
