cambridge university museums benchmarking 2014 aggregate ... · cambridge university museums’...

© The Audience Agency 2015

Cambridge University Museums

benchmarking 2014

Aggregate report

Pamela Pfrommer, Head of Learning Resources

&

Daniel Cowley, Research Manager

January 2015

© The Audience Agency 2015 2

Contents

Executive summary ......................................................................................... 3

About this report ............................................................................................ 4

Key theme summaries ...................................................................................... 6

Theme 1 – Demographics and mapping.................................................................. 7

Theme 2 – Group type and size, visit frequency and dwell time .................................16

Theme 3 - Motivations .....................................................................................20

Theme 4 – Visitor behaviour and knowledge ..........................................................22

Theme 5 – Marketing awareness and effectiveness ..................................................25

Theme 6 – Satisfaction levels ............................................................................29

Theme 7 – Crossover of visitors .........................................................................31

Audience Spectrum and Mosaic profiles ...............................................................34

Further analysis ............................................................................................41

Visits and visitors ......................................................................................... 41

Crossover with other UCM museums ................................................................... 43

Recommendations ..........................................................................................44

Appendix .....................................................................................................48

1.1 Comparative data .................................................................................... 48

1.2 Audience Spectrum pen portraits ................................................................. 50

1.3 Mosaic Group pen portraits ......................................................................... 52


Executive summary

Summary – existing audiences and potential 2014

In total 920,199 visits were made across the eight sites in 2014

The most prominent age group was 55-64, accounting for around one in five visits

More than half (54%) of all visits were made by adult groups

Although two thirds (65%) of visits were made by those identifying as White British, 13%

we made by those identifying as BME, an increase of 4% on 2013

Over half of visits (54%) made in 2014 were by new visitors; a quarter of visits were

made by frequent audiences (i.e. those who visited the site more than once a year)

In 2014 over a third (35%) of visits were from those visiting whilst on holiday

Visitors are staying longer – the percentage of visits lasting an hour or more has

increased, from 46% to 57%, and average dwell time has increased by nine minutes

Two thirds (64%) of visits to UCM were made by generalists (as opposed to specialists or

those having little or no knowledge of the subject area of the museum), a slight decline

on 2013

Spending time with friends and family was the most often cited motivation, mentioned

as the main motivation for visiting for just under a quarter (23%) of visits

Local knowledge, word of mouth and the museum’s website were among the most

common cited sources of information prompting visits to UCM

UCM visitors rate the overall experience very highly (99% rating their visit Very good or

Good) and are Very likely (96%) to make recommendations to visit

Core Audience Spectrum segments which are found in significant numbers of UCM visits

and are also over-represented compared to the population of the East of England are

Commuterland Culturebuffs, Metroculturals and Experience Seekers. These account for

54% of all visits and just 22% of the population of the East of England

The most under-represented Audience Spectrum segments are Trips & Treats, Facebook

Families and Dormitory Dependables. These account for 52% of the East of England

population but only make 29% of UCM visits.

Whilst Audience Spectrum (and Mosaic) profiles contained in this report are useful to inform

segmentation of current and potential UCM audiences, further qualitative research has also

been undertaken by UCM to explore non visitors’ characteristics, attitudes and behaviour.

Consideration of that research alongside these findings may prove valuable in providing context

for future engagement strategies with hard to reach audiences (e.g. Facebook Families).


About this report

Background

Cambridge University Museums’ requirement was for a programme of audience data gathering

for benchmarking purposes to be put in place during 2013. This was repeated during 2014 to

inform the practice and development of their collective partnership working and tell them

more about their individual and collective audiences.

Aims

To create a consistent method of audience data collection and benchmarking for

University Cambridge Museums (UCM)

To provide UCM with usable and practical insights into their visitors to inform planning,

reporting and audience development strategies

To provide UCM with a strategic overview of visitor trends and comparison with other

national museum clusters

Data was collected in three research waves and involved seven museums from Cambridge

University Museums (UCM) and the Botanic Garden working together to understand more about

their own visitors and the context for visits. The participating museums were:

Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology

Museum of Classical Archaeology

The Fitzwilliam Museum

Kettle’s Yard

The Polar Museum

Sedgwick Museum of Earth Sciences

Whipple Museum of the History of Science

Cambridge University Botanic Garden

UCM identified a set of key themes they wanted to explore through the research and questions

were chosen accordingly to address the following:

Provenance - where visitors are from and whether they are new visitors

Frequency of visits and visit length

Age and ethnicity

Group make-up and size

Satisfaction levels

Level of knowledge


Motivation for visit

Marketing awareness/effectiveness including use of mobile technology

Visitor crossover

Fieldworker training and research fieldwork was carried out in advance of each research wave,

using an interviewer led approach with internal museum staff, volunteers and externally

recruited staff collecting data through tablets and/or paper questionnaires.

This report follows delivery of individual site reports describing each museum’s visitors in

terms of the stated themes and in the context of UCM benchmarks with comparisons between

2013 and 2014.

Reading this report

This report contains aggregate findings for each theme, along with some deeper analysis of

specific areas, as agreed with UCM. The weighted UCM benchmarks describe the combined

audience across eight sites (excluding the Museum of Zoology) and take into account the fact

that sites with more visitors contribute more strongly to the benchmarks. Where appropriate,

some results may instead be compared to the UCM average which describes the average result

across all sites, and does not take into account the relative visitor figures across the museums.

(Full results with raw data for each question asked can be provided in a separate excel

document).

Sample size and margins of error

3,365 questionnaires were completed over the three research waves and across the year

920,199 visits were made (an increase of 14,456 on 2013); this gives an overall margin of error

of ±2% at the 95% confidence level. For questions with fewer responses, this margin of error

will be greater, and for questions where responses diverge from 50%, it may be smaller. Care

must be taken with some of the results of individual museums based on the sample sizes

gathered – specifically, the Polar, Whipple and Classical Archaeology Museums where the

margin of error was greater than ±5.

Analysis should also be considered in the light of UCM’s regular visitors and its scheduled

programme of events, some of which have dovetailed with the research period, e.g. Festival of

Ideas in October - November 2014.


Key theme summaries

The following sections describe the findings under 7 key themes:

1. Demographics and mapping

2. Group type and size, visit frequency and dwell time

3. Motivations

4. Visitor behaviour and knowledge

5. Marketing awareness and effectiveness

6. Satisfaction levels

7. Visitor cross over

Full results for each question included in the survey are given in the appendices.


Theme 1 – Demographics and mapping

This theme describes the demographic profile of visitors to the UCM group – gender, age,

ethnicity, disability status – along with their place of residence. Apart from an increase in Black

and Minority Ethnic (BME) visitors for 2014, there was negligible change across the demographic

picture in comparison to 2013.

59% of visitors were female and 41% male (the same proportion as 2013)

29% of visitors were aged 16 – 34; 33% were aged 35 – 54 and 39% were aged 55+ with

the most prominent age group being 55-64, accounting for around one in five visits.

65% of visits were made by those who classified themselves as White British, 21% by

those who classified themselves as ‘Other White’ background, and 13% were BME

visitors, the latter an increase of 4% on 2013.

The proportion of visitors with a disability decreased marginally, at 6%.

Which of the following age groups do you belong to?

Differences in age profile

The Archaeology and Anthropology Museum had the highest proportion of visitors

under the age of 34 at 39%, just ahead of the Sedgwick

The Museum of Classical Archaeology had the highest proportion of 35 - 54 year olds

at 42%, followed by the Sedgwick

Kettle’s Yard had the highest proportion of over 55s at 44%, just ahead of The

Fitzwilliam

4%

9%

16%15%

18%19%

15%

5%

3%

10%

15%

17%

16%

19%

16%

4%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

16 - 19 20 - 24 25 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74 75 or older

Benchmark (2014) Benchmark (2013)


What is your ethnic group? (Grouped)

2014 saw declines in numbers of visits across all categories apart from those visiting whilst on

holiday. 26% of visits were made by those living in Cambridge, 24% from those living outside

Cambridge but not holidaying or on a day trip; 13% whilst on a day trip from home; 35% from

those visiting whilst on holiday (an increase of 17% on 2013) and 2% from outside Cambridge for

professional/study reasons.

Which of the following best describes you?

65%

21%

6% 4%2% 1%

71%

20%

5%2% 1% 1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

White British White Other Asian or AsianBritish

Other Mixed/multipleethnic

background

Black or BlackBritish


35%

26%24%

13%

2%

18%

39%

25%

15%

3%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

I am visiting themuseum whilst on

holiday (i.e. atleast one night

away from home)

I live, work orstudy near the

museum(Cambridge city)

I am visiting themuseum from

outside Cambridge

I am visiting themuseum as part of

a day trip fromhome

I am visiting themuseum for

professional/studyreasons



Of all UCM visitors, 80% were UK resident with 20% from overseas. The notable increase of 9%

in overseas visitors may be the result of the extra data collection wave undertaken during

summer 2014, which did not happen in 2013.

Do you live in the UK?

Differences in tourism

The Museum of Classical Archaeology had the highest proportion of visits from those

who were Cambridge resident or visiting for professional reasons at 54% and 7%

respectively, but the lowest proportion in every other category

The Polar Museum had the lowest proportion of visits from those that were Cambridge

resident at 14%, but the highest proportion of visits from those outside the city at 29%

and whilst on holiday at 46%

The Sedgwick Museum had the highest proportion of visits from those whilst on a day

trip at 16% with the Museum of Classical Archaeology and Kettle’s Yard the lowest at

7%

In 2014, visitors were asked for the first time about which method of transport was used. Over

a third (37%) travelled by foot, which backs up the idea of a core local market, and also likely

includes those who were staying locally but live elsewhere.

80%

20%

89%

11%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Yes No



How did you travel here today?

Mapping

Those who were visiting UCM from the UK provided their postcodes and these have been

mapped as shown on the following pages.

The maps show visitors at regional and local level and can be used (alongside postcodes

supplied in separate Excel data) to illustrate specific areas of high concentration that reflect

current visitor behaviour, and areas of low concentration that are counter to current visitor

behaviour.

On the pinpoint maps, each dot represents a survey respondent, coloured according to the site

at which they were interviewed. On count maps, the colour of the postal sector indicates the

proportion of visits made from that postal sector, with darker colours indicating a larger

proportion of visits.

37%

32%

21%

14%

8%

1% 1% 0%0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

On foot Car Bus Train Bicycle Coach Taxi Other

Benchmark (2014)


Regional maps


Local maps


Performance vs. propensity to visit by postal sector

The first map below shows what percentage of the adult population of each postal sector have

visited any museum in the last 12 months, according to the TGI population survey. The second

map compares this with the number of visits made to UCM sites according to the 2014 UCM

visitor survey, highlighting areas which are contributing more or fewer UCM visitors than might

be expected given the background level of museum-going in that postal sector.

Background level of museum attendance, based on the TGI survey


Over-/under-attendance, based on the TGI survey

Reading the maps

Green zones on the map show those areas where UCM are over-achieving compared to what we

know about museum attendance amongst the population of that area from the TGI survey. Red

areas are those where TGI suggests high propensity to attend museums relative to the level of

representation in the UCM audience. Orange areas are those where the level of attendance at

UCM museums matches the level of attendance we would expect to see based on TGI. Areas in

white are those from which there were no visitors in the UCM sample (although this is not to

say these areas yield no visits).

The amount of over or under-representation from each postal sector is based on the number of

UCM visits made from these areas and the TGI data about the proportion of the population who

have visited any museum in the past year. As such:

Areas are coloured green when residents have larger representation in the UCM

audience than the TGI survey’s levels of general museum attendance for that postal

sector would suggest


Areas are coloured orange when residents’ propensity to attend museums matches their

observed attendance at UCM sites. This could mean they have a high propensity to

attend museums in general and are also often found amongst UCM vistors, or they have

a low propensity and are seldom seen at UCM sites.

Areas are coloured red when residents have a high propensity to visit according to the

TGI survey but a low representation amongst UCM visitors

Sample size

Although the UCM sample size overall was healthy, when breaking it down to the number of

visitors from individual postal sectors some error is introduced; a larger sample would produce

a more accurate map with, potentially, more pronounced differences between postal sectors.

Distance from Cambridge

The colour of postal sectors on the map does not take into account distance from

venues/accessibility. Given that, generally, the easier it is for people to get to Cambridge the

more likely they are to visit a UCM museum, the expectation would be to see more green areas

closest to Cambridge, and more red areas at further distances. The map broadly show this, but

highlights some areas of interest – i.e. red areas where neighbouring sectors are green, and

vice versa.

Implications

Given the sample size there are pockets of areas in the mapping where the index is higher or

lower than in neighbouring postal sectors and which are close enough to Cambridge (in terms

of distance) to be geographically relevant. The main three areas are:

The yellow patch below Newmarket and around Royston which is not doing quite as

well here compared to surrounding areas were locations for recent UCM focus groups

with non-visitors. These represent opportunities for developing non-traditional

attenders such as Facebook Families.

There are various green patches within a 30 – 45 minute drive time North from

Cambridge, and east of St Ives where UCM is currently doing well in attracting visitors

and where potential remains for development of core visitor groups Commuterland

Culturebuffs and Trips and Treats.

South of St Ives – with no data (white) from this area in the sample, this bucks the

local trend but may or may not be a fertile ground to develop an audience from


Theme 2 – Group type and size, visit frequency and dwell time

More than half (54%) of all visits were made by adult groups, 25% by single adults and 20% by

family groups (i.e. at least one adult and one or more under-16 year olds). Of visits made by

groups, the most common group size was two people – 46% of all visits and 61% of group visits.

Differences in group type

The Whipple Museum had the highest proportion of single adult visitors at 32%

Kettle’s Yard had the highest proportion of adult group visitors at 65%, and the lowest

proportion of family visits at 9%

The Sedgwick Museum had the largest proportion of family visitors by some distance,

at 47%, and the smallest proportion of single adult visitors at 18%

Group type

54%

25%

20%

0%

50%

28%

21%

1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Adult group Single adult Family group Unknown group



Group size

In total, 920,199 visits were made across the eight sites in 2014 and of these, just over half of

visits (54%) were made by new visitors. Half of visits were made by people who had not, in the

last 12 months, visited any UCM sites other than the one at which they were interviewed. Of

those who had visited another UCM site, the Fitzwilliam was the most often visited.

Other UCM museums visited in past 12 months (not including site at which interview took

place)

25%

46%

13%

8%

4%1% 1% 0% 0%

2%

28%

43%

12%

7%3%

2% 1% 1% 0%3%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ormoreBenchmark (2014) Benchmark (2013)

50%

32%

15% 14% 12% 11% 10%5% 4%

36% 37%

23%20% 19%

14% 16%

6% 5%

14%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%



In the chart below, the average rather than the benchmark is shown as the large number of

repeat visitors at the two largest sites (the Fitzwilliam and the Botanic Garden) means the

benchmark, whilst accurately describing the overall UCM audience, is quite different from the

picture seen at the other sites.

On average three quarters of visits were made by first-time or lapsed visitors, an increase of 7%

on 2013. The increase in first time visits is notable (from an average of 54% to 62%), but likely

to some extent to be a reflection of a notable increase in visits from holidaymakers, who are

less likely to have been before.

Visit history

Differences in visit frequency

The Whipple and Polar Museums had the highest proportion of first time visitors at

84% and 81% respectively

The Botanic Garden had the lowest proportion of first time visitors at 40%

Kettle’s Yard had the highest lapsed visitor rate (i.e. someone who had been before,

but not in the last 12 months) at 21%. The lowest lapsed visitor rates were 9% at both

The Polar and Museum of Classical Archaeology

The Botanic Garden had the highest proportion of visits made by frequent visitors

(45%), followed by the Fitzwilliam Museum at 41%. The Whipple Museum had the

lowest at 4%.

The Botanic Garden also had the highest average annual number of visits amongst

frequent visitors, at 8.6 visits per year.

62%

13%

25%

54%

14%

33%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

First-time visitor Lapsed visitor (not been onanother occasion in the past 12

months)

Frequent visitor (been on atleast one other occasion in the

past 12 months)

Average (2014) Average (2013)


Overall, dwell time has increased by 9 minutes in 2014. In particular, visits of under 30

minutes have fallen from 21% of visits to 13% of visits.

Length of visit

Site (2014) Average visit

length (minutes)

Median visit length

(minutes)

Mode visit length

(minutes)

Fitzwilliam Museum 78 65 60

Kettle's Yard 55 49 60

Museum of Archaeology & Anthropology 48 40 30

Museum of Classical Archaeology 49 40 30

The Polar Museum 58 50 60

Sedgwick Museum of Earth Sciences 49 42 30

Whipple Museum of the History of Science 44 40 20

Cambridge University Botanic Garden 95 80 60

Benchmark (2014) 73 60 60

Benchmark (2013) 64 53 60

13%

30% 30%

12%

7%

4%2% 1% 1% 0%

2%0% 0% 0% 0%

21%

33%

24%

11%

6%

2% 1% 1% 0% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0%0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

0:0

0 -

0:2

9

0:3

0 -

0:5

9

1:0

0 -

1:2

9

1:3

0 -

1:5

9

2:0

0 -

2:2

9

2:3

0 -

2:5

9

3:0

0 -

3:2

9

3:3

0 -

3:5

9

4:0

0 -

4:2

9

4:3

0 -

4:5

9

5:0

0 -

5:2

9

5:3

0 -

5:5

9

6:0

0 -

6:2

9

6:3

0 -

6:5

9

7:0

0 o

r lo

nger



Theme 3 - Motivations

Motivation was investigated through two questions. The first asked visitors to consider all

possible reasons for visiting, illustrating the mixture of different motivations, and the second

part asked which their main reason was, identifying their most important motivating factor.

For the first question where all possible motivations were asked, To learn something was the

most common choice (42%), followed by To spend time with friends and family (40%), To enjoy

the atmosphere (38%) and intellectual stimulation (37%). However, when we look at visitors’

main motivation, To spend time with friends and family on 23% was highest by some margin,

followed by To learn something (10%), To enjoy the atmosphere (10%) and To be intellectually

stimulated (9%).

Though social reasons were most often cited as the main motivation, learning and intellectual

stimulation are also important to visitors, but are usually interpreted differently, with

‘learning something’ being more to do with discovery and the attainment of ‘interesting facts’

whereas being ‘intellectually stimulated’ has more to do with being excited and encouraged to

think about and imagine things in a different way.

Which of the following describe your reasons for visiting today? (Main reason only)

23%

10% 10% 9%8%

7%5% 5%

4% 4% 3%3% 3% 2% 2%

1% 1% 1%

21%

14%

2%

8%10%

8%

6% 6% 6%

1%3%

0%

3% 3%2%

1% 1%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

To s

pend t

ime w

ith

frie

nds/

fam

ily

To l

earn

som

eth

ing

To e

njo

y t

he a

tmosp

here

To b

e inte

llectu

ally s

tim

ula

ted

Oth

er

To b

e insp

ired

For

the p

eace a

nd q

uie

t

I w

ante

d t

o b

ring m

y c

hildre

n

To b

e e

nte

rtain

ed

Muse

um

's r

eputa

tion

To d

o s

om

eth

ing n

ew

/out

of

the

ord

inary

For

academ

ic r

easo

ns

Vis

itin

g m

use

um

s is

an im

port

ant

part

of

who I a

m

Childre

n w

ante

d t

o c

om

e

I tr

y t

o v

isit

muse

um

s as

oft

en a

sI can

For

pro

fess

ional re

aso

ns

To e

scape f

rom

every

day lif

e

For

refl

ecti

on



Differences in motivation

We can see that visitors’ combination of motivations has a similar pattern across the UCM

group - where learning and intellectual stimulation, socialising and wanting to be inspired

were amongst the most important factors where all motivations could be considered.

The Whipple Museum had the highest proportion of visitors who cited learning as a

reason for visiting (59%) and the Botanic Garden the lowest at 27%

The Botanic Garden had the highest proportion of visitors wanting to spend time with

friends and family at 52%, followed by the Sedgwick at 48%

The Whipple Museum had the highest proportion visiting for intellectual stimulation

at 54% closely followed by Kettle’s Yard at 52%

The Museum of Classical Archaeology had the highest proportion of visitors for

academic and professional reasons at 16% and 7% respectively

Kettle’s Yard had the highest proportion of visitors citing inspiration (54%) and the

museum’s reputation (28%) as reasons for visiting

The Botanic Garden had the highest proportion of visitors motivated by the

atmosphere (61%), for peace and quiet (50%) and reflection (23%)

The Botanic Garden and The Whipple Museum had the highest proportion of visitors

wanting to satisfy their interest in the subject matter, accounting for 32% and 31%

respectively

The Sedgwick Museum had the highest proportion of parents wanting to bring children

(32% of visits), followed by the Museum of Classical Archaeology (26%), whilst the

Sedgwick rated highest (20%) for children wanting to come.


Theme 4 – Visitor behaviour and knowledge

Visitor behaviour addressed what visitors did as part of their visit. The majority of all visits

involved seeing the permanent collection (86%); 38% of visits took in the shop, 37% a temporary

exhibition and 25% the café and 3% attended a talk, screening or workshop.

2014 saw increases in those visiting for a general visit and for a temporary exhibition in

comparison to 2013 figures. Visits for temporary exhibitions were significant in some individual

museum instances, for example 30% at Kettle’s Yard.

When we look at the main thing people visited for, more than two thirds (71%) of visits were

‘general visits’ – i.e. not driven by a desire to see or use any one aspect or facility in

particular, while 16% of visits were made to see specific exhibitions, displays or works. All

other aspects were in line with 2013 benchmarks which also indicated the majority of UCM

audiences (albeit a slimmer one) were not visiting with a specific purpose in mind.

Why did you visit the museum today? (Main reason only)

71%

16%

4% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1%

55%

11%6%

3% 3% 3%6%

1%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

For

a g

enera

l vis

it

To s

ee a

specif

icexhib

itio

n/dis

pla

y/w

ork

For

anoth

er

ele

ment

of

the

muse

um

To u

se t

he c

afé

Stu

dy/Rese

arc

h

For

a t

alk

, sc

reenin

g,

work

shop o

r oth

er

event

To u

se t

he s

hop

To l

ook a

t th

e b

uildin

g



Differences in elements driving a visit

Kettle’s Yard and The Fitzwilliam had the highest proportion of visits to see a specific

exhibition at 30% and 25% respectively

The lowest proportion of visits made for ‘general’ reasons were made at Kettle’s Yard

and the Museum of Classical Archaeology, both at 57%, whilst the highest proportions

were at the Sedgwick and the Botanic Garden with 83% and 82% respectively

The Museum of Classical Archaeology saw the highest proportion of study/research-

driven visits at 8%

Kettle’s Yard recorded the highest proportion of visitors whose main purpose was to

look at the building at 5%

Across the board, relatively few visits were made for the café or shop. The largest

proportion of visits made for these reasons were found at The Fitzwilliam, at 5% and

3% respectively

In relation to knowledge of subject matter, two thirds of visits (64%) were made by those with

a general knowledge of the subject area of the museum, a quarter (25%) by those with little or

no knowledge and just over one in ten (11%) visits by those with specialist knowledge of the

subject matter.

How would you describe your knowledge of the subject matter of this museum?

11%

64%

25%

10%

67%

24%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Specialist General Little or no knowledge



Differences in knowledge

A similar proportion of visits were made by generalists at all sites, but three were some

notable differences in the proportions of visits made by those with specialist or little.no

knowledge.

The highest proportion of general visits was seen at the Fitzwilliam at 69% and the

lowest at the Botanic Garden at 61%

The highest proportion of visits made by those with little or no knowledge was seen at

the Botanic Garden at 31% with the lowest being the Fitzwilliam at 19%

The largest proportion of visitors who considered themselves specialists was seen at

Kettle’s Yard (15%), with the lowest proportions at the Botanic Garden and Polar

Museum both at 8%

These differences may reflect the subject areas or levels of specialism of each site’s

collections/exhibitions as much as the level of knowledge of the visitors. For

example, it is likely that more specialist collections will attract specialists, and

discourage those with little or no knowledge.

When looking at visitors’ involvement in the subject matter, an almost identical picture can be

seen when comparing 2013 and 204 figures:

Are you involved with this museum/subject matter in your everyday work through any of the

following?

5% 6% 3% 6%

81%

5% 7%3% 5%

82%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Teachin

g

Stu

dyin

g

Pro

fess

ionally e

mplo

yed

in t

he c

ult

ura

l/m

use

um

/heri

tage s

ecto

r Oth

er

Not

involv

ed in t

his

subje

ct

in m

y e

very

day

work



Theme 5 – Marketing awareness and effectiveness

This theme was investigated through three questions. Visitors were asked to consider what

information sources they were aware of in advance, then what information sources had given

them the strongest encouragement to visit and finally what the most important source of

information was in their decision to visit.

The information sources with the highest level of awareness by visitors in advance of their visit

were Friend, colleague and family member (22%), Other (19%) and the Museum’s website

(15%). The most common ‘Other’ responses were about having local knowledge, with not

insignificant numbers citing maps and tourist information.

24% of visits were made by people who had not seen any information in advance, indicating

that visitors knew of the site before considering a visit, and may have visited previously.

Which of the following had you seen or heard before your visit today?

22%

19%

15%

12% 12%

8%

4%3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0%

24%25%26%

22%20%

5%

14%

8%

4% 5%3%

2%

5%

2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2%

11%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

A f

riend/colleague/fa

mily m

em

ber

Oth

er

The m

use

um

's w

ebsi

te

Sig

ns

and info

rmati

on o

uts

ide t

he

muse

um

Lam

ppost

banners

for

the m

use

um

Muse

um

leafl

et/

bro

chure

/oth

er

pri

nt

pic

ked u

p

Muse

um

post

er

els

ew

here

Em

ail f

rom

the m

use

um

New

spaper/

magazin

e f

eatu

re o

r list

ing

Guid

ebook

Cam

bri

dge t

rain

sta

tion p

ost

er

Featu

re o

r list

ing o

n a

websi

te o

r blo

g

Muse

um

leafl

et/

bro

chure

/oth

er

pri

nt

post

ed t

o m

e

Info

rmati

on a

bout

the m

use

um

on p

ublic

transp

ort

*

Advert

isem

ent

in n

ew

spaper/

magazin

e

Info

rmati

on a

bout

the m

use

um

in t

he

UCM

Shop

Em

ail f

rom

anoth

er

org

anis

ati

on

Fro

m a

noth

er

pers

on o

r org

anis

ati

on o

nFacebook/Tw

itte

r

Muse

um

's F

acebook p

age

Muse

um

's T

wit

ter

Advert

on a

websi

te o

r blo

g

Radio

/te

levis

ion f

eatu

re

None o

f th

ese

I did

not

see o

r hear

any info

rmati

on…



Word cloud for literal responses to ‘Other’

A similar picture was seen when looking at visitors’ main information source, with word of

mouth (19%) and Other (17%) again coming out on top.

And which was your main source of information for your visit?

19%17%

10%

7%6% 5%

2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

25%

19%

24%

15%

9%

1%

7%

2%1% 1%

3% 2% 1%0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1%

11%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

A f

riend/colleague/fa

mily m

em

ber

Oth

er

The m

use

um

's w

ebsi

te

Sig

ns

and info

rmati

on o

uts

ide t

he m

use

um

Lam

ppost

banners

for

the m

use

um

Muse

um

leafl

et/

bro

chure

/oth

er

pri

nt

pic

ked u

p

Guid

ebook

Featu

re o

r list

ing o

n a

websi

te o

r blo

g

Em

ail f

rom

the m

use

um

Muse

um

post

er

els

ew

here

New

spaper/

magazin

e f

eatu

re o

r list

ing

Muse

um

leafl

et/

bro

chure

/oth

er

pri

nt

post

ed t

o m

e

Cam

bri

dge t

rain

sta

tion p

ost

er

Muse

um

's T

wit

ter

Advert

on a

websi

te o

r blo

g

Fro

m a

noth

er

pers

on o

r org

anis

ati

on o

nFacebook/Tw

itte

r

Info

rmati

on a

bout

the m

use

um

on p

ublic

transp

ort

*

Advert

isem

ent

in n

ew

spaper/

magazin

e

Em

ail f

rom

anoth

er

org

anis

ati

on

Info

rmati

on a

bout

the m

use

um

in t

he U

CM

Shop

Muse

um

's F

acebook p

age

Radio

/te

levis

ion f

eatu

re

None o

f th

ese

- I d

id n

ot

see o

r hear

any info

rmati

on…



Responses to visitors’ use of the museum’s website and mobile technology were explored in

questions asked for the first time in 2014. Just under two thirds of visits (62%) were made

without either having visited the museum’s website or planning on visiting it post-visit. Of

those who did use it, reasons were to do with finding out information to inform their visit in

advance: the highest proportions being to check opening hours (19% of visits), to find out what

was on before visiting (13%) and for directions (8%).

How have you used, or do you intend to use, the museum's website in relation to today's visit?

Ownership and use of mobile technology was also explored for the first time in 2014. Over two

thirds (72%) owned a smartphone, the most popular being an iPhone - 34% of visits being made

by iPhone owners. Use of a smartphone in relation to planning a visit was undertaken by a

minority visitors with just 8% accessing a website via their phone and 6% using an app in

relation to their visit.

19%13%

8%6% 5% 5% 4%

1% 1%4%

62%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

To c

heck o

penin

g h

ours

To f

ind o

ut

what

was

on

befo

re v

isit

ing

To f

ind o

ut

how

to g

et

here

To f

ind o

ut

more

about

part

icula

r obje

cts

or

exhib

itio

ns

I sa

w t

oday

To l

ook a

t th

e c

ollecti

ons

and o

ther

online c

onte

nt

To f

ind o

ut

more

about

part

icula

r obje

cts

or

exhib

itio

ns

befo

re v

isit

ing

To r

ese

arc

h s

om

eth

ing in

part

icula

r

To b

row

se t

he o

nline s

hop

To b

uy s

om

eth

ing f

rom

the

online s

hop

Oth

er

I have n

ot

and d

on't inte

nd

to u

se t

he w

ebsi

te in

rela

tion t

o t

oday's v

isit

Benchmark (2014)


Do you have a smartphone?

Did you use a smartphone to help plan your visit to this museum?

34%

27%

5%

35%33%

27%

5%

36%39%

23%

5%

35%

40%

32%

4%

25%

32%29%

2%

40%

29% 29%

3%

40%38%

31%

5%

28%29%

33%

10%

30%34%

27%

5%

36%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Yes, an iPhone Yes, an Android phone Yes, anothersmartphone*

No

Benchmark (2014) Fitzwilliam Museum (2014)

Kettle's Yard (2014) Museum of Archaeology & Anthropology (2014)

Museum of Classical Archaeology (2014) The Polar Museum (2014)

Sedgwick Museum of Earth Sciences (2014) Whipple Museum of the History of Science (2014)

Cambridge University Botanic Garden (2014)

8% 6% 4%

83%

10%5% 5%

82%

8% 8%2%

82%

6% 4% 2%

88%

2%6% 6%

88%

4%9%

4%

83%

12%5% 4%

80%

11%7% 3%

80%

7% 5% 4%

85%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Yes, I used a website viamy phone

Yes, I used an app* Yes, in another way* No

Benchmark (2014) Fitzwilliam Museum (2014)

Kettle's Yard (2014) Museum of Archaeology & Anthropology (2014)

Museum of Classical Archaeology (2014) The Polar Museum (2014)

Sedgwick Museum of Earth Sciences (2014) Whipple Museum of the History of Science (2014)

Cambridge University Botanic Garden (2014)


Theme 6 – Satisfaction levels

Overall, 99% of visitors rated UCM Good or Very good in terms of their overall experience, and

all other areas were rated favourably. Besides the overall experience, ease of access (92%

Good or Very good), staff welcome (84%) and information about the objects/collection (79%)

were also rated highly. The least favourably rated elements were signage inside museums (72%

Good or Very good) and external signage on the street (60%).

96% of visitors were either Likely or Very likely to recommend a visit to a museum with the

Whipple Museum having the lowest proportion of visitors likely or very likely to recommend at

91% and the Botanic Garden the highest at 98%.

How likely are you to recommend a visit to the museum to your friends/family?

68%

28%

3% 1% 0%

72%

25%

3% 1% 0%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Very likely Likely Neither likely norunlikely

Unlikely Very unlikely



How would you rate the following?

65%

58%

41%

29%

47%

38%

29%

20%

40%

40%

36%

33%

24%

24%

22%

52%

38%

64%

57%

33%

41%

50%

58%

43%

47%

48%

52%

45%

46%

48%

48%

55%

53%

52%

41%

55%

30%

37%

1%

1%

8%

12%

7%

10%

17%

22%

11%

11%

12%

14%

15%

18%

17%

5%

5%

5%

5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

The whole experience (2013)

The whole experience (2014)

Shop (2013)

Shop (2014)

Bar or café facilities (2013)

Bar or café facilities (2014)

Information about the accompanying programme of events (2013)

Information about the accompanying programme of events (2014)

The temporary exhibition (2014)

Information about the objects/collection (2013)

Information about the objects/collection (2014)

Signage around the museum (directions) (2013)

Signage around the museum (directions) (2014)

Signs outside the museum (2013)

Signs outside the museum (2014)

Ease of access in and around the Museum (2013)

Ease of access in and around the Museum (2014)

How welcoming the staff were (2013)

How welcoming the staff were (2014)

Very good Good Neither good nor poor Poor Very poor


Theme 7 – Crossover of visitors

Individual museums were interested to know to what extent their visitors also visited other UCM museums in the group. The following table

describes this crossover, with each column showing what percentage of that museum’s visitors had also visited each of the other sites in the

past 12 months.

Other UCM museums

visited in past 12 months

Fit

zw

illiam

Muse

um

Kett

le's

Yard

Muse

um

of

Arc

haeolo

gy &

Anth

ropolo

gy

Muse

um

of

Cla

ssic

al

Arc

haeolo

gy

The P

ola

r M

use

um

Sedgw

ick M

use

um

of

Eart

h S

cie

nces

Whip

ple

Muse

um

of

the H

isto

ry o

f

Scie

nce

Cam

bri

dge

Univ

ers

ity B

ota

nic

Gard

en

Fitzwilliam Museum 53% 52% 66% 43% 44% 47% 47%

Kettle's Yard 18% 18% 32% 11% 14% 14% 17%

Museum of Archaeology & Anthropology 14% 13% 32% 16% 25% 19% 14%

Museum of Classical Archaeology 4% 3% 4% 4% 6% 5% 5%

The Polar Museum 10% 13% 13% 26% 14% 13% 9%

The Sedgwick Museum 9% 7% 22% 27% 15% 22% 12%

Whipple Museum 3% 5% 6% 17% 7% 7% 5%

Cambridge University Botanic Garden 16% 18% 18% 32% 15% 17% 13%

No other UCM museums 63% 43% 38% 23% 49% 42% 44% 46%

Base 627 432 447 138 220 485 188 828


For the UCM audience as a whole it is worth noting that The Fitzwilliam was likely to be visited by visitors of all other museums, but also the

Fitzwilliam has the highest proportion of visitors who had not visited any of the other museums in the past year. Kettle’s Yard had lower

crossover. This is perhaps to be expected, given the Fitzwilliam’s large number of visitors.

Conversely, the Museum of Classical Archaeology has the highest level of crossover with other museums, with 77% of its visitors having also

visited another UCM museum in the past 12 months, yet visitors to other museums are unlikely to have visited the Museum of Classical

Archaeology. Again, this is to a large extent, a function of that museum’s relatively low number of visitors per year.

High levels of crossover

Notably high levels of crossover can be found between:

All museums and the Fitzwilliam

Museum of Classical Archaeology and all other museums

Archaeology & Anthropology and the Sedgwick – 22% also having visited the Sedgwick in the past 12 months

The Sedgwick and Archaeology & Anthropology – 25% also having visited the Sedgwick in the past 12 months

Whipple and Sedgwick – 22% also having visited the Sedgwick in the past 12 months

The chart below highlights which other local leisure, arts and cultural organisations visitors are engaging with which may have implications

for partnership work and audience crossover campaigns, the most-visited other organisations being London galleries or museums (31%) and

Kings College Chapel (18%). Visits by UCM visitors to almost all the listed other organisations were down in 2014 compared to 2013, and just

over a quarter (26%) had not visited any of the listed organisations.


Which of the following have you visited for leisure purposes within the last 12 months?

18%

15% 14%12%

10%8% 8% 7% 7%

6% 5% 5%4%

2% 2%

31%

26%25% 25%

23%

20%18%

12% 12%13%

10%9%

10%8%

4% 3% 2%

44%

13%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%



Audience Spectrum and Mosaic profiles

Audience Spectrum profiling

Audience Spectrum is a population profiling tool which identifies the differences between

attendance, participation and engagement as well as behaviours, attitudes and preferences at

arts, museums and heritage organisations. It has been built to meet the needs of both small

and large scale, ticketed and non-ticketed organisations from across the cultural sector.

Audience Spectrum has been commissioned for the sector from The Audience Agency, (Arts

Council England commissioned this tool and ACE Relationship Managers have been briefed

about Audience Spectrum and its uses).

Audience Spectrum maximises the benefits of the previous AAI segmentation tool from ACE -

however using new and expanded data sets Audience Spectrum allows users to target and

profile audiences more effectively at postcode level. It provides a more detailed analysis of the

broader arts and heritage market with the practical geo-location benefits of the Mosaic

classification system.

The top Audience Spectrum segments across UCM are below with more detailed descriptions

and pen portraits of segments at http://audiencefinder.org/audience/#segmentation/taa

Audience Spectrum profile

17%

23%

14%

17%

10% 10%

4%2% 3%

1%1%

15%

6%

22%

20%

12%

7%

10%

3% 4%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Benchmark (2014) Population (East of England)

http://audiencefinder.org/audience/#segmentation/taa


Commuterland Culturebuffs, Metroculturals, Dormitory Dependables and Experience

Seekers can be said to represent UCM’s ‘core’ visitor base, together accounting for 71% of

visits. Having high proportions of a few core visitor segments has implications for UCM

collectively which can be reflected or countered in some of the recommendations made around

communications, partnerships, programmes, participatory and outreach work.

When we consider the extent to which segments are over- or under-represented amongst UCM

visitors compared to the population of the East of England, we can get a sense of which types

show a particular propensity to attend UCM museum. Commuterland Culturebuffs,

Metroculturals and Experience Seekers are all over-represented amongst UCM visitors – so if

more people like them can be found to live locally, they are likely to be the most easily

reached and converted into visitors. The locations of such prospects could be identified

through further analysis of the local area.

In summary the museums with the highest proportions for each Audience Spectrum segment are

as follows:

Metroculturals

Highly engaged prosperous liberal urbanites, with wide range of arts and cultural interests

High engagement (ranked 1st)

17% of UCM visits

1% of East of England population

Top museums - Botanic Garden, Kettle’s Yard and Museum of Classical Archaeology

Commuterland Culturebuffs

Affluent suburban and greenbelt consumers of culture, see culture as part of their social

lives

High engagement (ranked 2nd)

23% of UCM visits


Top museums - Fitzwilliam, Polar Museum and Botanic Garden

Experience Seekers

Diverse urban audiences, students and recent graduates into a variety of cultural events

High engagement (ranked 3rd)


14% of UCM visits


Top museums - Museum of Archaeology & Anthropology, Kettle’s Yard and Polar

Museum

Dormitory Dependables

Regular but not frequent cultural attenders, living in city suburbs and small rural towns

Medium engagement (ranked 4th)


17% of UCM visits

Top museums - Sedgwick Museum, Whipple and Museum of Classical Archaeology

Trips and Treats

Suburban households, often with children, whose cultural activities are usually part of a

planned day out or treat



10% of UCM visits

Top museums - Museum of Archaeology & Anthropology and Sedgwick Museum

Home & Heritage

Conservative and mature households who have a love of the traditional cultural and

heritage offer



10% of UCM visits

Top museums - Kettle’s Yard and Whipple Museum

Up Our Street

Reasonably comfortably off households, occasional audiences for popular arts &

entertainment, museums and heritage

Lower engagement (ranked 7th)


4% of UCM visits

Top museums – Polar Museum, Whipple Museum, Sedgwick and Museum of

Archaeology & Anthropology

Facebook Families


Harder pressed and financially stretched suburban and semi-urban households for whom arts

and culture plays a small role



2% of UCM visits

Top museums – Whipple Museum, Polar Museum, Sedgwick Museum and Museum of

Archaeology & Anthropology

Kaleidoscope Creativity

Urban and culturally diverse, their arts and cultural engagement happens within their

community and outside the mainstream



3% of UCM visits

Top museum - Whipple Museum

Heydays

Older people who now, due to circumstances, find it harder to access arts and cultural

activities that they may once have enjoyed



1% of UCM visits

Top museum - The Polar Museum

Mosaic profiling

The Mosaic system of consumer classification segments the population into sizeable groups with

distinct needs and lifestyles. Each profile contains a wealth of information about

characteristics and consumer behaviour and includes newspaper readership, television and

radio consumption habits, predisposition to certain leisure activities and even whether or not a

particular group is more likely to respond to discount promotions or value added initiatives.

This is rich information that can be used to inform aspects of an audience development or

communications plan.

Liberal Opinions, Professional Rewards and Alpha Territory groups may be said to represent

UCM’s ‘core’ visitor base, together accounting for 54% of visits. When comparing UCM visitors

with the population of the East of England as a whole it is clear that the Liberal Opinions


group is strongly over-represented amongst UCM visits (26% of visits compared to 5% of the

population). Alpha Territory (11% compared to 4%) and Professional Rewards (17% compared

to 12%) both show notable levels of over-representation.

See http://audiencefinder.org/audience/east for Area Profile Report comparisons for both

Audience Spectrum and Mosaic profiles comparing East England to England as a whole.

Mosaic group profiles

Mosaic group profile

Liberal Opinions: Young, professional, well educated people who are well read,

cosmopolitan in their tastes and liberal in their views. Neighbourhoods can contain a high

proportion of the country’s students living in term-time accommodation. Highly engaged

with arts and culture.

Professional Rewards: The UK’s executive and managerial classes, often in their 40s, 50s or

60s, some may be owners of small or medium sized businesses whilst others will have risen to

senior positions in large national or international businesses. Engaged with arts and culture.

Alpha Territory: The most wealthy and influential individuals in the UK who have risen to

positions of power in the private and public sectors. Very engaged with arts and culture.

11%

17%

5%

7%

4%

8%7%

3% 2%0%

2% 1%

3% 3%

26%

4%

12%

5%

14%

5%

13%

8%7%

8%

2%1%

4%

7%

4%5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Benchmark (2014) Population (East of England)

http://audiencefinder.org/audience/east


Mosaic type profile

The top ten Mosaic types below accounted for 44% of all UCM visits:

From the Alpha Territory group: Voices of Authority (6%)

From the Liberal Opinions group: Crash Pad Professionals (7%), Convivial Homeowners

(7%), and University Fringe (4%), Bright Young Things (3%)

From the Professional Rewards group: Dormitory Villagers (4%), Yesterday's Captains

(4%), Mid-Career Climbers (3%)

Top ten Mosaic types

Crash Pad Professionals: Young, single professionals, highly educated, often in their late 20s

or early 30s, living in modern purpose built flats in suburban locations, particularly in outer

London and surrounding areas who prefer to live in a clean, functional and well maintained

block. The Crash Pad Professionals type are significant within Cambridge city and have much

in common with other types within the overall Liberal Opinions group.

Convivial Homeowners: Well educated people in their late 30s and 40s, who are bringing up

a young family in an area of pleasant, older style housing in a middle ring suburb of a large

city with comfortable but not exceptional incomes from their employment.

Voices of Authority: Many of the most influential figures in British society, aged between 36

and 65 and of British origin, who exercise thought leadership in politics, media, universities,

7%

7% 6%

4% 4% 4%

3% 3% 3% 3%

9%

7%7%

4% 4%

5%

3%4%

3% 3%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%



hospitals and law. These are people whose letters are published in the correspondence pages

of The Times and whose opinions are shared with listeners to Radio 4’s Today Programme.

Often find it more convenient to live close to cultural centres, which is where many of them

also have their formal place of work. Spend time browsing arts, entertainment and sports

websites and buying tickets online.

Yesterday's Captains: Yesterday's Captains are mostly older professionals and managers who

live in attractive and spacious houses in well-established suburbs; they have active minds

and interests and are approaching retirement or already there. Their tastes are relatively

conservative and they are active supporters of local cultural events, particularly concerts.

Television and newspapers are a good way to reach them; their Internet use is limited.

Dormitory Villagers: This is a somewhat upmarket version of Middle England, characterised

by middle class, middle-of-the-road attitudes. Most commute to white-collar and

professional jobs in nearby towns, choosing to bring up their children in a village setting.

Dormitory Villagers make a distinction in their minds between spending on daily necessities,

where they are careful not to waste money, and on more occasional treats. They are heavy

Internet users and if they go out in the evenings, it's normally with their families.

University Fringe: A mix of students living alongside graduates who are starting out on

careers whilst still enjoying the city student lifestyle. University Fringe is a very young type –

almost everyone is under 35. There are people here from many different ethnic backgrounds

and most households are shared houses. They may be single people, or co-habiting couples in

some cases.


Further analysis

Visits and visitors

In total, 920,199 visits were made across eight sites in 2014. By comparing each site’s number

of visits with the proportions of those at each museum who had visited on another occasion in

that year, and the average number of visits in the past year for those who had, we can see how

many individuals attended each museum.

When we consider repeat visits in 2014 by frequent visitors, we see that, although on average

accounting for 25% of visits, these individuals accounted for on average just 6% of individual

visitors - so a relatively small proportion of people (6%) are making a relatively large

proportion of visits (25%).

Visits and visitors are often taken to mean the same thing – for instance “visitor figures”

usually actually describe the number of visits made to a venue in a time period, and do not

take into account the fact one individual may have made multiple visits. Therefore the

number of visitors in a given time period will always be less than the number of visits made

in the same time period (or the same, if each visitor only visited once).

Visit: an instance of an individual entering the museum or site.

Visitor: an individual who entered the museum or site during the time period. A visitor may

have made multiple visits in this time period.

In order to calculate how many individual visitors were present in a year, we need to know:

How many visits were made in that year

What % of visits were made by people who only visited once in the year and what %

of visits were made by people who visited more than once in the year

The average number of visits per year of those who visited more than once

So, for example, these figures break down as follows for the Fitzwilliam Museum:

340,542 visits in 2014

59% only visited once in 2014 = 201,601 visitors making 201,601 visits

41% visits made by those who had visited on at least one other occasion in 2014 =

138,941 visits

Average visit frequency for these visitors = 6.1 visits per year

Number of these visitors = 138,941 / 6.1 = 22,777 visitors

Total number of visitors in 2014 = 201,601 + 21,777 = 224,378 visitors


The table below shows for each site what percentage of visitors make what percentage of

visits. For example, at Kettle’s Yard frequent visitors account for 11% of individuals but make

32% of visits, and on average 62% of visits are made by first-timers, who account for 76% of

visitors. For the Botanic Garden, just 4% of visitors make 45% of all visits, so a large number of

visits are being made by a small core audience.

Museum

First time Lapsed Frequent

% visitors % visits % visitors % visits % visitors % visits

Fitzwilliam Museum 68% 45% 22% 15% 10% 41%

Kettle's Yard 62% 47% 27% 21% 11% 32%

Museum of Archaeology

& Anthropology 79% 71% 16% 14% 4% 15%

Museum of Classical

Archaeology 79% 64% 11% 9% 10% 27%

Polar Museum 88% 81% 9% 9% 3% 11%

Sedgwick Museum of

Earth Sciences 79% 62% 16% 13% 5% 25%

Whipple Museum of the

History of Science 86% 84% 13% 12% 1% 4%

Cambridge University

Botanic Garden 70% 40% 25% 15% 4% 45%

Average (2014) 76% 62% 18% 13% 6% 25%

For all sites, the results in this report describe visits not visitors. For example the benchmark

of 99% rating a visit positively means that 99% of visits resulted in a positive rating, not

necessarily that 99% of individuals rated their experience positively. As frequent visitors are

more prominent in the sample (being more likely to be on site to be interviewed than people

who visit less often), sites where frequent visitors account for a particularly large proportion of

the audience may see their results being skewed towards the profile, motivations, experiences

etc. of frequent visitors.

Given that first-time, lapsed and frequent visitors are likely to have different needs and

expectations of a visit, and may also have a different demographic profile, it may be worth

exploring these areas in more detail in order to best serve these three types of visitor.


Crossover with other UCM museums

In the previous analysis of whether or not visitors to each site had visited one or more of the

other UCM sites in the previous year, those who were visiting that site for the first time were

included in the analysis. Those who have were visiting the museum at which they were

interviewed for the first time are more likely than those who have visited the museum before

to have also visited other UCM sites. Therefore, first-time-at-this-museum visitors were

removed from the following analysis of attendance at other sites:

UCM museums visited in past 12 months (not including first-timers)

When first timers are removed, a more accurate picture of those in the market for crossover

can be seen, which makes it easier to draw out the differences between the sites, and makes

the characteristics of those visitors more pronounced. For example, the above chart shows

high levels of crossover from the Museum of Classical Archaeology and the Museum of

Archaeology & Anthropology to other UCM sites, and low crossover from the Fitzwilliam to the

other UCM sites. This difference is more pronounced than then first-timers are included in the

analysis.

67%56%

71%

87% 88%

74% 79% 78%71%

33%44%

29%

13% 12%

27% 21% 22%29%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Not visited other UCM museums in the past 12 months

Visited other UCM museums in the past 12 months


Recommendations

Audiences

UCM is already successful at attracting significant numbers of visits given its location and the

geo-demographic profile of the local population. Its visitor profile is representative of its local

population and it attracts a wide range of visitors beyond its city boundaries. This puts it in a

strong position to broaden its reach and in particular to attract audience groups that it could

develop further:

Less mature, under 55, mainstream audiences who are not currently visiting UCM in

large numbers and do not feature amongst current audience groups.

‘Typical’ museum audiences (Experience Seekers) younger, highly educated, digital

natives, open minded and busy – are, as we would expect, already represented amongst

UCM visitors, but not to the extent they might be expected given their representation

within the wider population.

UCM already reaches a family focused demographic (certain sites such as the Sedgwick

and Archaeology and Anthropology museum are more successful than others, where we

know visitors are actually making visits with their children), however there are

significant proportions of these people within a 30 minute drive time for potential to be

increased within these groups.

Less confident audiences within a 30 minute drive time (Facebook Families), especially

those who are not prepared/or are unable to travel further afield and may require

events with low barriers to engagement. Feeling self-conscious, embarrassed and under-

pressure is commonly experienced by less privileged families who are new to cultural

venues and UCM should specifically look to avoid activities or scenarios that could evoke

those feelings. This could be through the type of content, the

format/presentation/setting and communication messages, examples of which are

contained in the qualitative research report UCM commissioned based on focus groups

with family non-users.

Increasing Black, Minority Ethnic and disabled audiences is more about access and

representation than communications and exhibitions. Increases in numbers of BME

audiences however can be seen in 2014 though under-representation of some other

ethnic groups may require additional consultation and events aimed at reducing barriers

to attendance within identified communities.


Audience development planning

By using findings from postcode profiling, UCM can see which segments make up their current

audience; it will almost certainly be the case that some of the segments will be much better

represented than others. The top ones represented in this report may be said to be UCM’s

‘core’ audience. By looking at audiences in this way, UCM can use these profiles to try and

identify more people of the same kind to try to engage. For example, Audience Spectrum pen

portraits contain a range of suggested engagement strategies which can help to inform events,

marketing and communication messages. On the other hand, it may be the case that some of

the less well represented profiles within UCM could form new target audiences for UCM to

reach with new programme offers. These could be segments that form the basis for outreach,

audience development, access or inclusion work.

There are a number of tools to help UCM set a strategic direction, one classic tool is the Ansoff

Matrix which is contained in the Audience/Visitor Finder online audience development planner

http://audiencefinder.org/plan/

The matrix can help consider the relationship between the museum programme offer and type

of visitor, to help balance your efforts across four potential strategic approaches for long-term

audience development.

Partnerships and collaborative activity

In terms of working with partners to develop audiences, there are a range of possible options

for hosting and creation of exhibitions including working with Cambridge/shire arts

organisations or organisations which combine both arts and science (e.g. other university

partners) and using venues which are arts, science or neutrally based. Each type of

organisation and venue will to a certain extent bring its own type of audience with it, but

present barriers to different audiences. Likewise, each will bring particular sets of skills and

expertise.

Since the majority of UCM’s audience is generalist, rather than specialist, the greatest

potential for development of crossover audiences could come from working with other arts-

based providers. These opportunities could also bring with them relevant front-of-house and/or

audience development expertise. Working with partner organisations encourages more active,

ongoing engagement with new and different ideas and approaches to developing audiences,

however partners should be selected based on the potential for long-term relationships and

mutual benefit, with time and resources to develop those links planned in.

http://audiencefinder.org/plan/


Interpretative materials

There were no changes to satisfaction levels in 2014 with regard to information about the

objects/collection. Striking a balance within interpretation between the needs of different

types of visitors however is a real challenge facing museums. There is potential for greater

differentiation for different audience needs from the research findings. Any group review of

interpretation materials should consider all three sorts of visitor types - generalists, specialists

and those with little or no knowledge, alongside differentiation of events for ‘families’ and

those for children, even if they need to be accompanied.

Clear and accessible interpretation within UCM is important as new visitors are less likely to

read large amounts of written information. It could be a useful exercise for UCM staff to review

exhibition interpretation from the perspective of different types of new visitor to ensure

information is accessible and engaging and that content supports visitors with social

motivations as well as those who attend to learn. Special activity sheets or guides designed for

less traditional family and adult visitors who are new to museums could be explored as a way

to achieve this.

Links between the collections and references to different aspects of popular culture could be

used as an engagement strategy. For example, participants from family focus groups suggested

a screening of Night at the Museum within the Museum of Zoology. There are also examples of

projects that have successfully used film to engage hard to reach groups. The Family Friendly

Film Festival in the North West engaged families through film screenings and hands on

activities (often connected to collections) programmed within cultural venues. This festival

provided an entry point to the sector through fun and familiar activities.

UCM’s Festival of Ideas, Science Festival and Twilight are all examples which have regular

annual attenders and offer wider promotional opportunities for other UCM events. It may also

be useful to signpost events which require more advanced prior knowledge and/or

understanding. This will not only help ensure that those specialists with more knowledge are

more likely to attend and be satisfied, but implicitly offers assurances to others of the level of

prior knowledge expected.

Word of mouth (Ambassador Approaches)

Given the high percentage of visitors likely to recommend a visit and high first time visitor

rates, re-attendance and word of mouth is a valuable asset. UCM Ambassadors could be

recruited through volunteers, Members or Friends to identify people from each target visitor

segment for face to face networking. It will probably be most effective (and not too resource


intensive) to create two ambassador groups, one for Experience Seekers and one for Facebook

Families. Once ambassadors have been recruited, they can be briefed with information about

forthcoming UCM programmes and events and potentially provided with targeted marketing

materials. They then use their local contacts and networks to spread the word, encouraging

their contacts to attend and potentially even accompanying people on their first visit. For

further details of the variety of different ambassador approaches used in the cultural sector

see case studies on www.culturehive.co.uk

Digital

The UCM website is a key promotional tool in providing benefits led information to potential

visitors about UCM’s entire offer, and in particular, practical information about visiting,

directions, location, opening hours etc. As part of Visitor Finder www.visitorfinder.org UCM

also have access to digital metrics through an online dashboard. The Hitwise analytics tool can

provide information about traffic to UCM websites and the online behaviour of internet users,

including some top level information about which websites audiences visit prior to arriving at

UCM website and where they go post visit. Hitwise collates information regularly at a

household level, (data is representative of a household rather than each individual internet

user within that household). This can be a tool for marketers and web content developers in

understanding traffic referrals from search engines and can be used to improve SEO. However,

in order to get a complete picture of the behaviour and profile of UCM’s web visitors, it is also

recommended that UCM use this information in conjunction with insights from their Google

Analytics accounts. A range of downloadable resources created by Culture24 addressing all

aspects of digital development, including Google Analytics guidance can be accessed at

http://audiencefinder.org/articles/culture24-digital-resources

http://www.culturehive.co.uk/

http://www.visitorfinder.org/

http://audiencefinder.org/articles/culture24-digital-resources


Appendix

1.1 Comparative data

The figures below demonstrate the nature of regional attendance patterns within the

population of East England. The similarities between the different geo-demographic profiling

systems mean that there is likely to be a high degree of accuracy in these identifications. From

a purely business case point of view, this macro data represents a market place of great

potential and should help inform the core parts of any subsequent collective UCM audience

development activity.

Taking Part in the Arts: 2013/14

Taking Part is a government led household survey in England and measures cultural

participation from the view point of the individual. The overall figures for visiting arts,

museums and galleries in East England in 2013/14 show a relatively stable position since

2012/13.

The headline findings for 2013/14 are:

The proportion of people who have engaged with the arts once or more in the last 12

months has remained stable at 83%

The proportion of people who have visited a heritage site at least once in the last 12

months has remained stable at 74%

The proportion of people who have visited a museum or gallery at least once in the last

12 months has increased slightly since 2012/13 from 51% to 53%

Levels of donations show a downward trend in the last few years and decreased again

from 33% in 2012/13 to 30% in 2013/14

Levels of people who have digitally participated in culture in the 12 months has

remained stable at 45%

Cultural attendance patterns TGI: East England

In terms of arts and cultural attendance, the East has a higher proportion of people than the

England average (average being 100), who say they have attended an arts events in the last 12

months (art galleries, ballet, classical concerts, contemporary dance, jazz, opera, plays,

pop/rock music and theatre), with those who attend art galleries once a month or more having

an index of 383 and those who attend cinema once a month or more an index of 135 (Target

Group Index). Museum visits are also above average, with an index of 149 for people who say

they have made a museum visit in the last 12 months.


This report has used both Audience Spectrum and the Mosaic classification system for its geo-

demographic profiling. Audience Spectrum segments that over represented in the East are

Commuterland Culturebuffs, Dormitory Dependables, Trips and Treats and Home & Heritage as

seen below:

Segment East England

Index Count % Count %

Metroculturals 38,708 1% 2,005,864 5% 20

Commuterland Culturebuffs 696,846 15% 5,170,839 12% 125

Experience Seekers 303,262 6% 3,316,530 8% 75

Dormitory Dependables 1,053,457 22% 7,162,472 17% 129

Trips & Treats 960,228 20% 7,268,637 17% 118

Home & Heritage 551,410 12% 3,842,188 9% 133

Up Our Street 343,750 7% 3,027,972 7% 100

Facebook Families 477,606 10% 5,360,779 12% 83

Kaleidoscope Creativity 139,471 3% 4,234,493 10% 30

Heydays 172,172 4% 1,663,933 4% 100

Total 4,736,910 100% 43,057,086 100% 100


1.2 Audience Spectrum pen portraits

The following are brief descriptions of the main Audience Spectrum segments. More

information on characteristics, communication preferences and examples of engagement

strategies can be found at: http://audiencefinder.org/audience/

Metroculturals

Prosperous, liberal urbanites, Metroculturals choose a city lifestyle for the broad cultural

opportunity it affords. They are therefore interested in a very wide spectrum of activity, but

many tend towards their own preferred artform or style, but represent good prospects for new

work. Although active museum attenders, more engage with the arts and many on a weekly

basis. Working in demanding but rewarding professions, they are highly educated and have a

wide variety of other interests from food and travel to current affairs and architecture.

Commuterland Culturebuffs

Affluent and settled with many working in higher managerial and professional occupations.

Commuterland Culturebuffs are keen consumers of culture, with broad tastes but a leaning

towards heritage and more classical offerings. Mature families or retirees, living largely in leafy

provincial suburban or greenbelt comfort, they are willing to travel and pay for premium

experiences, their habits perhaps influenced by commuting. Motivations are multiple, ranging

from social and self-improvement, to the pursuit of learning opportunities for older children.

They tend to be frequent attenders and potential donors.

Experience Seekers

An important and significant part of urban arts audiences, these highly active, diverse, social

and ambitious singles and couples are younger people engaging with the arts on a regular basis.

Students, recent graduates in the early to mid-stages of their careers, they live close to city

centres, to have easy access to a wide variety of arts, museums galleries and heritage.

Interests cover mainstream, contemporary and culturally diverse offers and attending is at the

heart of their social lives. They are mostly in search of new things to do and have disposable

income to spend on a variety of leisure activities like sports/arts memberships and frequent

visits to cafes, bars and restaurants. Digitally savvy, they will share experiences through social

media on their smartphones.

Dormitory Dependables

A significant proportion of audiences are made up of this dependably regular, if not frequently

engaging group. Most live in suburban or small towns and show a preference for heritage

activities, alongside popular and more traditional, mainstream arts such as rock/music

concerts. Many are thriving, well off mature couples or busy older families; lifestage coupled

http://audiencefinder.org/audience/


with more limited access to an extensive cultural offer means that culture can be more an

occasional treat or social outing rather than an integral part of their lifestyle.

Trips & Treats

While this group may not view arts and culture as a passion, they are reasonably active despite

being particularly busy with a wide range of leisure interests such as sport. Comfortably off and

living in the heart of suburbia their children range in ages, and include young people still living

at home. With a strong preference for mainstream arts and popular culture like musicals and

familiar drama, mixed in with days out to museums and heritage sites; this group are led by

their children’s interests and strongly influenced by friends and family.

Home & Heritage

Conservative in their tastes, this more mature group appreciates all things traditional: a large

proportion are National Trust members, while crafts, classical music and amateur dramatics

are comparatively popular. While this is not a highly engaged group – partly because they are

largely to be found in rural areas and small towns – they do engage with the cultural activity

available to them in their locality. They look for activities to match their needs and interests,

such as accessible day-time activities or content exploring historical events.

Up Our Street

Living reasonably comfortable and stable lives, Up Our Street engage with popular arts and

entertainment and museums, and are also occasional visitors to heritage sites. Many are older

and have some health issues, living on average or below average household incomes, so access

in all its forms can be an issue. Modest in their habits and in their means, value for money and

low-risk are important factors in leisure decision making.

Facebook Families

Arts and culture play a very small role in the lives of this younger, cash-strapped group living in

suburban and semi-urban areas of high unemployment. They are the least likely to think

themselves as arty, while less than a third believe that the arts is important. Nevertheless,

they do go out as families: cinema, live music, pantomime and eating out are their most

preferable leisure pursuits.

Kaleidoscope Creativity

Characterised by low levels of cultural engagement despite living in and around city areas

where plenty of opportunities are within easy reach. A great mix of people comprise this

segment with a wide range of ages, living circumstances, resources and cultural backgrounds

all living cheek-by-jowl. Low incomes and unemployment can present barriers to accessing


some cultural provision. Nevertheless, two thirds do engage with more popular and accessible

culture annually, some of this in the local community and outside the mainstream. Free, local

events like outdoor arts, festivals and carnivals may appeal, and so might popular offerings like

musicals and music events.

Heydays

Heydays are the group least likely to attend arts or cultural events, believing that the arts are

no longer as important or relevant to them as perhaps they once were. Many live in sheltered

or specially adapted accommodation for older people, and are excluded from many activities

due to a raft of health, access and resource barriers. If they do engage this is likely to be

participatory such as craft and knitting, painting, reading and writing activities organised by

their housing, church group or community library.

1.3 Mosaic Group pen portraits

Alpha Territory

Alpha Territory contains many of the most wealthy and influential people in Britain. Well

educated, with senior roles in the private and public sector and the professions, Alpha

Territory have significant disposable income. They are able to enjoy a luxury lifestyle, and live

in the most sought after neighbourhoods. They lead busy and stressful lives, yet are frequent

arts goers across arrange of art forms, in particular museums and galleries and classical music.

Professional Rewards

Professional Rewards consists of executive and managerial classes with a comfortable lifestyle.

Often in their 40s, 50s or 60s, some may be owners of small or medium sized businesses whilst

others will have risen to senior positions in large national or international businesses.

Professional Rewards are comfortably off; they seek value for money rather than the lowest

prices, but will pay a premium for reliability and quality. Tastes are generally conservative,

with preferences for good taste over ostentation. They are interested and reasonably regular

arts goers, mainly to mainstream theatre and exhibitions. This group will provide

knowledgeable audiences for theatres and concert halls.

Liberal Opinions

Liberal Opinions contains young, professional people with a university education. Interested in

exploring the world around them, open minded and risk taking, they lead full and busy lives –

often with no clear boundary between work and leisure. For this reason it is often more

convenient for them to live in accessible inner suburbs. The group also contains a high

proportion of the country’s students living in shared accommodation. This group are over-


represented in communications jobs, such as journalism, politics, entertainment and the arts,

fashion and design, university education and the Internet.

They have a very high propensity to attend the arts; frequent and broad ranging in their arts

going, providing the core audience for all kinds of contemporary work in particular. They visit

the cinema and the theatre and attend museums, exhibitions and public lectures.


Contacts

London Office

Unit 7G1

The Leathermarket

Weston Street

London SE1 3ER

Manchester Office

Green Fish Resource Centre

46–50 Oldham Street

Northern Quarter

Manchester M4 1LE

[email protected]

www.theaudienceagency.org

Registered in England & Wales 8117915

cambridge university museums benchmarking 2014 aggregate ... · cambridge university museums’...

Documents