Carolyn Meehan
Does free entry increase visitation and
improve access to museums?
Two widely supported benefits of free entry are that it leads
to increased visitation, and that it allows a broader section
of the community to access museums than when a fee is charged.
But what audience research supports these claims? The new Melbourne
Museum became interested in the question of free entry when identifying
a pricing structure, and conducted research on the issue prior
to and after opening. The following article examines the results
of this research.
Barriers to visitation
Four in every five Victorians over 18 had not visited Melbourne
Museum in the first 12 months of opening. Their three main reasons
were:
- distance/convenience Ð museum too far from
home; too hard to get to; seldom come into city
- lack of interest Ð interested in other
things; museums not their scene; just not interested
- lack of time Ð too busy; working too much;
donÕt have time.
Interestingly, two in three Victorians did
not even know whether Melbourne Museum had an entry fee or, already
thought it was free! The research also showed that while seven
in ten Victorians believe that museums should be free only one
in ten nominated cost as a reason they might not visit. This would
seem to indicate that other barriers have greater impact and that
cost may be a secondary rather than a primary barrier. Therefore
even when entry is free, visitation may only ever marginally improve.
Visitation numbers
While nearly one in three Victorians would not visit if entry
were free, the research did indicate that free entry could cause
an initial increase in visitation. Overall, 12% more Victorians
would visit Melbourne Museum if entry were free.
A more significant outcome of free entry,
however, could be more frequent visitation. People who had already
visited or were disposed to visiting indicated they would visit
more often if museum entry was free. The number of people making
only one visit in twelve months might decrease, but the number
visiting two or more times would increase by over a quarter.
However, repeat visitation is not as straightforward
as it may seem, and once again free entry may not automatically
result in an increased number of visits. When asked what would
get them to come back to Melbourne Museum, visitors often cited
new or changing exhibitions. However, when asked on the day of
a visit why they had come, they usually cited such things as 'to
bring friends' or 'to entertain children' and so on. Less often
was the visit prompted by a specific desire to see something new.
It is highly likely that people have a natural
cycle of visitation to museums which often cannot be hastened
Ð one visit every 1-2 years is perhaps the most common cycle.
Visitors report wanting to wait some time between visits because
things seen in the visit are still too fresh in their minds, and
that they have other things to do.
Indeed, a big barrier to visitation, greater
than that of cost, was that visitors did not expect the museum
to change sufficiently to warrant another visit. So there is some
resistance to repeat visitation.
A final point on visitation is that when using
research into likely visitation, a differentiation between intention
and action must be made. People do not always do what they think
they might! Therefore, the increases indicated by the research
may never actually materialise. Based on experience, Melbourne
Museum discounts figures stating intention to visit by up to two
thirds.
Visitor mix
Increased access by all socio-economic groups is another potential
outcome of free entry to museums. However since opening, Melbourne
Museum has recorded a high number of lower-income visitors as
well as younger people, neither of which are traditional museum
audiences. Even with an entry fee both of these groups have been
well-represented. In fact, lower-income families have continued
to increase their share of the visitor mix, and while the number
of younger visitors has begun to decrease, a reduction in the
novelty factor may account for this rather than the entry fee.
Melbourne MuseumÕs 1st Birthday last October
provided an excellent opportunity to explore the issue of free
entry. On that day, one in three visitors cited free entry as
their reason for visiting. Both the visitor mix and visitation
numbers differed from a normal Sunday.
Although free entry undoubtedly contributed
to this, there was another factor at work: entry was free, but
only for that day! There was a need to act now. When a museum
always has free entry, there is no incentive to come on any particular
day, and as time goes on the other barriers (like being too busy,
too far away or simply not interested enough) start to affect
the will to visit. Therefore, even with free entry an additional
reason to visit Ð a call to action Ð is needed.
Conclusions
Research shows that entry fees are one, but possibly not the most
significant, barrier to visitation and access. Museums must focus
on overcoming the major barriers of distance, time and interest
as well as resolving the issue of entry price. Free entry might
be the easiest strategy to implement but reducing the impact of
the other barriers Ð while harder to understand and do Ð will
be vital to increased visitation and access over time.
Carolyn Meehan
Carolyn has been the manager of Market Research & Evaluation at
Museum Victoria since 1994.