com 615 marketing research_ramirez aramis

Running Head: Increasing Patronage at the Seabee Museum

Increasing Patronage at the Seabee Museum

Aramis X. Ramirez

National University

COM 610

Professor Marguerite Hillman

June 26, 2015

Running Head: Increasing Patronage at the Seabee Museum

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………..………… 3

FOCUS GROUP TESTING………………………………….………………..... 6

QUALITATIVE SURVEY…………………………………………..………….. 9

REFERENCES………………………………………………….………….…… 12

APPENDIX (A): FOCUS GROUP TRANSCRIPT ……………...……...…… 13

APPENDIX (B): SURVEY MONKEY METRICS…………….…..…………..18


INTRODUCTION

In 2011, the U.S. Navy Seabee Museum moved into a new, climate-controlled, large

building. This building is located outside the perimeter of Naval Base Ventura County,

Port Hueneme because it was concluded that residing on base meant limiting visitation to

those who could easily gain access, while deterring those who would not. Several years

later, patronage slowly has been gaining traction, seeing about an average of twenty

percent year over year. Ideally, a national military history museum would like to see large

numbers in visitation so the purpose of this research project will be to identify strengths

and weaknesses in the museum’s interpretive and public education programming.

The formal mission of the museum is to select, collect, preserve and display historic

material relating to the history of the Naval Construction Force, better known as the

SEABEES, and the U.S. Navy Civil Engineer Corps. This coincides with the purpose of

this research, which is to ensure we are selecting the right artifacts to absorb into our

collection that will tell the stories patrons wish to hear and see at the museum. Not only

that, but to identify what exhibits in the museum are satisfying the mission so as to

continue supporting it.

The other area of exploration is of course analyzing the effectiveness of our

communications. It is important to determine of the methods and channels currently

being used are effective in reaching the people we wish to reach. Our assumptions are

that with older patrons (by this we can identify “older” as being mostly derived of retired

military, mostly Vietnam-era), traditional channels like newspapers, and television are

useful, while younger generations prefer more online and social media-focused

communications.

3


The objective of this research will be comprised of two major focus areas:

interpretive planning and communication channels.

Qualitative Research

Chenail (2011) notes the root of qualitative research is the use of open-ended

questions to engage in dialogue that leads to discovery, rather than simply analytics (p.

255). He notes that recorder bias can occur when interviewers begin to select people who

fit a certain type of person that will satisfy a mentally pre-determined set of conclusions,

while also noting challenges also exist in drafting useful open-ended questions (p. 256).

For this project, the questions under this research methodology will ask patrons what they

like about the museum, what they do not like, how they perceive the flow of the exhibits,

what topics do they wish to see covered and what channels of communication do they

prefer to learn about museum exhibits and public events. Responses will be recorded via

digital audio recorder with the following group make-up:

1. Patron (Older)

2. Patron (Younger)

3. Volunteer (Older)

4. Volunteer (Younger

5. Employee (Newly staffed)

6. Employee (Longer staffed)

Three main areas will be covered in this group because it is important to capture the

perspectives everyone involved. The patron will offer their outsider’s perspective of their

impressions before and after visitation, volunteers will offer what they think when they

inform others about the museum and exhibits, and staff will offer what directions they

4


would like to take, and what they feel is working and not working in the interpretive

planning. Common themes will be captured and recorded in an excel sheet to display

frequency of appearance in the interviews.

Quantitative Research

While the development and delivery of the quantitative method appears to be

simpler, it is no less challenging than the qualitative method. Creswell (2013) explains

that research in this area means examining the relationship among variables. These

measurable variables can be analyzed using statistical procedures and therefore can

protect against bias for which the quantitative approach can fall prey (p. 4).

To remain consistent with non-bias, online approaches to conducting the survey will

best. Survey Monkey has the easiest and friendliest means of generating and conducting

the survey as well as delivering responses. The participants will be solicited from the

museum’s online properties and randomly selected from patrons visiting the museum by

distributing survey invitations on cards with the Survey Monkey URL printed on them.

The questionnaire will consist of closed-ended questions and likert scale questions form

which analysis can be conducted on the results as they are received from the survey

service and entered into a spreadsheet.

5


FOCUS GROUP TESTING

The purpose of the focus group was to conduct qualitative research that covered two

areas, museum presentations and effectiveness of communications. In this case three

main subject areas were considered with regard to occupational perspectives with two

staff members, two volunteers and two patrons being invited to the group. To cover age

perspectives, each of the three main groups had one older and one younger respondent

invited to attend.

The Setting

To avoid bias, questions were kept to a minimum during the moderation process to

allow for the group to guide its own discussion. The location was considered to help

facilitate that discussion. The conference room in the museum offers a round table setting

to place all respondents on an equal level so no one person would feel more pressured to

answer a question over another.

Participants were recruited via personal invitation and the scheduled time was

suitable for all save for one who ended up not showing up to the group session. Elliot &

Associates (2005) recommend overshooting the minimum to ensure ideal participation.

The loss of one participant was better than expected, though in the event too many were

unable to attend, a secondary plan to hold additional focus groups was in place.

To account for moderator bias, questions were selected that would speak to a broad

discussion prior to the focus group.

What do you think the museum is lacking in its presentations? What were your first impressions of the museum’s presentations? What else could be done or presented differently? What are some things going well? What is most appealing to your favorite exhibits? What topics would you like to cover with the temporary ones?

6


How satisfied are you with the public education programs? What part do you think communications plays in that? Are there any other things that you feel need to be addressed with regard to

improving museum offerings or communications?

Appendix (A) offers a full transcript of the conversation recorded on an iPhone,

while a separate Excel spreadsheet outlines major themes from those answers. Having

both staff and patrons in the group allowed a balance of perspectives. The staff members

on the board seemed aware of some of the shortfalls of the museum reinforced by the

answers given by the patron and volunteers of the museum. The major themes broke

down as follows:

The Good The Bad

Exhibit Presentation Professional

presentations

Good use of space

Balance in historical

representations

Flow – signage need

to promulgate it

Communications Effective use of

online channels

Missing the mark on

traditional channels

like newspapers

Answers from the follow-up questions on exhibit presentation shed light on how the

museum can incorporate the temporary exhibits to unify the flow of the museum and

respondent seem to unify in the them of “fun” for the temporary exhibits. The group

expressed that while communications were hitting the mark with digital channels such as

social media accounts and blogs, traditional methods were being overlooked, such as

7


placement in newspapers, both the news publications and the local entertainment guides.

Conclusion

The focus group session shed light on a lack of balance for the exhibits and the

communications efforts with regards to the channels deployed in relaying messages to the

general public. The temporary exhibits can be an affective way to unify the exhibits, and

when coupled with the additional flow signage to promulgate movement as noted by the

focus group, should result in a different experience. The use of a wider survey of people

would help identify subject matter; a list of questions relating to Seabee related time

periods and asking people which one they’d like to see presented will help plan out the

schedule to make the museum more appealing to visitors. Similarly, we can assess which

channels are more effective in which to communicate to people. While the perception

may exists that we are ignoring traditional media, it may be that media is simply ignoring

what we’re presenting, which can be revealed in a larger quantitative survey process.

8


QUALITATIVE SURVEY

The purpose of the survey was to capture qualitative data that extends beyond the

sentiments expressed during the focus group. Those sentiments we wanted to qualify

were the satisfaction of the museum’s experiences because ultimately, it’s the patron’s

perceptions we need more of in order to understand those expressed in the focus group.

The Setting

As with the focus group, the first step in deploying the survey was to consider both

bias opportunity and reach. For bias in deployment, there is less opportunity due to the

fact that the responses are given anonymously, so interviewer bias does not present itself

in the way it can with focus groups.

To ensure equal coverage

and accessibility to the survey,

Survey Monkey was used to

capture responses online and

track results. An invitation was

extended via the museum’s

Facebook account.

But that left the question of

how to capture results from

those who physically visit the

museum, rather than simply had

access to the museum’s web properties. In such case, a printed copy of the survey was

made available at the front desk. The volunteers on duty were instructed to invite patrons

9


to participate in the survey as they were signing into the logbook. The responses were

then transferred to Survey Monkey. The original intention was to simply print out the

simplified URL to the Survey Monkey page offering the questions on an invitation card.

To maximize participation on such a short timeline, the printed survey in lieu of the

invitation card was preferred.

Data Analysis

Over the four-day availability 17 responses were received. Appendix B offers a full

breakdown of the responses provided by Survey Monkey. The questions were a mix of

demographical questions, Likert scale, and one open ended question. This information

will provide a good picture of who is responding. The sampling was varied with most of

the respondents falling into veterans, age group 45-59. This is representative of the

patrons that typically visit the museum on a regular basis.

The rest of the questions explore satisfaction in the museum’s exhibits, preferred

methods of communication and likelihood of repeat visitation and referral. Admittedly,

the survey was limited in scope due to the nature of the “basic” account with Survey

Monkey that limited the survey to ten questions. Ideally, follow-up questions would be

used that would have asked open ended questions to assess any answer that was below

the top answer to assess what improvements could be made. This is why of the ten

questions, the last question of the survey was an open-ended catch-all question to give

respondents an opportunity to propose suggestions.

Overall, survey participants expressed great satisfaction with the museum exhibits,

would visit the museum again and are highly likely to refer others to visit the museum.

The open-ended question expressed three major themes:

10


The STEM Center is highly favorable for patrons with families. Equal coverage for museum topics is desirable. The museum is nice overall.

Of note in the open-ended question is that not all participants elected to answer it, six no

responses total.

Conclusion

While the data presents a good picture of the overall satisfaction of the different

demographics that comprise the museum’s patronage, the open-ended question offered a

slightly deeper perspective that emulated the topics discussed in the focus group. The

STEM Center has been well received, but the topic of equal emphasis on the subject

matter for the exhibits popped up which mirrors focus group. This is useful in prompting

an actionable response plan in which we incorporate the feedback from both the survey

and the focus group. Business Research Lab (2013) also notes the first major step of

taking action on these results is communicating them to the museum staff so everyone is

aware of the overall performance of the museum and they can begin to derive ways to

improve upon some of the shortfalls identified in the survey and focus groups. As the

museum is still planning out future exhibits as part of its long-term interpretive plan, the

timing of these surveys and focus groups is fortuitous in that we can take this feedback

into consideration to plan out the temporary exhibits that will address some of the equal

coverage concerns.

11


REFERENCES

Business Research Lab. (2013). Acting on the Results of an Employee Satisfaction

Survey. Retrieved June 20, 2015 from

http://www.busreslab.com/index.php/articles-and-stories/esat-key-steps/acting-

on-the-results-of-an-employee-satisfaction-survey/

Chenail, R. J. (2011). Interviewing the Investigator: Strategies for Addressing

Instrumentation and Researcher Bias Concerns in Qualitative Research. The

Qualitative Report, 16(1), 255-262. Retrieved June 7, 2015 from

http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol16/iss1/16

Creswell, J. (2015). 1. In Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method

Approaches. (pp. 3-15). New York, NY: SAGE.

Elliot & Associates. (2005). Guidelines for conducting a focus group. Retrieved June 12,

2015 from

http://vizedhtmlcontent.next.ecollege.com/CurrentCourse/How_to_Conduct_a_Fo

cus_Group.pdf

Kadens, R. J., Linda, G., & Prince, M. (Eds.). (2012). Leading edge marketing research:

21st-century tools and practices. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452240558

12

http://vizedhtmlcontent.next.ecollege.com/CurrentCourse/How_to_Conduct_a_Focus_Group.pdf

http://vizedhtmlcontent.next.ecollege.com/CurrentCourse/How_to_Conduct_a_Focus_Group.pdf

Increasing Patronage at the Seabee Museum Appendix A

FOCUS GROUP TRANSCRIPT

Location: U.S. Navy Seabee Museum Conference RoomDate: June 11, 2015

InviteesFive (5) participantsSix (6) invitedOne (1) no-show

Moderator: Aramis Ramirez

Respondent Profiles

#1: Hanako Wakatsuki, Female, 31Staff (Education Specialist), employed at the museum for 1 year

#2: Kim Crowell, Female, 58Staff (Curator), employed at the museum 7 years

#3: Jean Noe, Female, 24Volunteer, worked at the museum for 4 months

#4: Jim Parker, 77Volunteer, worked at the museum for 5 years

#5: Joe Agee, 28Patron, U.S. Navy Seabee, served 6 years in job

13


Note: bolded questions represent those derived prior to the focus group session.

Moderator: Hey guys, thanks again for agreeing to participate in this discussion. I think it’s best to remind everyone what our goals for this conversation. First, we’re looking to discover where this museum is falling short in our presentations and communications, but also acknowledge where our strengths lie. Secondly, we’d like to assess those same aspects in communication efforts. I’ll be here to ask a few questions, but mostly facilitate a conversation. We have a 45-minute block for this, so please be respectful to the conversation and I’ll bring things back in if they go too astray; we want to be respectful of everyone’s time. As you can see we have a variety of perspectives at the table. So with that, first question is pretty obvious…what do you think the museum is lacking in its presentations?

#1: I think the flow of the museum makes it difficult for patrons to figure out the timeline we’re trying to communicate

#2: I can shed some light on at least a little bit of that. See when this building was first designed, there was a huge focus placed on World War II, so much so, some of the spaces were built around large objects. Of course some people in this group already know that when the building was complete, some of the exhibits were left unfinished because the foundation fronting the money overshot the costs. We had to make due with the spaces and what the Navy could afford to give us fiscally.

#1: I’ve learned that, but it seems like the holes we tried to fill in ourselves lack coherence. We have some nice presentations, but the flow seems off.

Moderator: Joe, Jean, Jim, as visitors and volunteers what were your first impressions of the museum’s presentations?

#5: I don’t know about what goes on behind the scenes, but I liked what I experienced. I was mostly curious about why some exhibits had a larger emphasis than others…

Moderator: Can you be more specific?

#5: I felt like World War II had a huge space, and from what I understand there’s even more space for it that’s not open yet because what we can see is just Atlantic Theater.

#2: That’s what I was talking about with the design of the building. There was supposed to be a huge focus on World War II. I think we voiced some of our opinions on the design because I know at least for myself I thought it was a little shortsighted to put so much into it. It lacks coverage of other historical events.

#5: Yeah, I mean, my family has military ties to Vietnam and Iraq, but those spaces are lacking.

14


#4: I agree. I’m a Vietnam vet and I want to see more on that. But it’s really not about this is all I care about so that’s all there should be. I think it’s more about finding that right balance.

#1: Right, but that also goes into how things are planned. If we did a lot more of these and actually heard from people and voiced our own concerns, there would be a different process on how things are developed.

Moderator: So we have concerns about balance, what else could be done or presented differently?

#1: Smaller things.

Moderator: Such as?

#1: Signage for one. We already have an issue with flow, what makes it even more an issue at least for me is that basic signage would direct people to alleviate that.

#2: I agree with that as well. Working in the old building where we pretty much filled every blank space with anything and everything, a piece of that mentality carried over to this place. We did right by planning out the spaces here, but those small things should be a part of how we do things.

#4: It would definitely make it a lot easier when directing people from the front desk where to go. Or even a sign that says ‘Start Here’ would make things probably a little easier – if only for those on self-guided tours.

Moderator: Before we move on, are there any other things you’d like to mention?

[no response]

Moderator: Ok, so what are some things going well?

#2: I think despite some of what we’ve talked about, this museum is really nice, especially if you knew where we were coming from. It really is a professional presentation, which was the goal for when we were planning this place out.

#1: Yeah, I think the build and the panels, as well as our accessibility lends to that experience.

#4: The space we have here make it easy for people to just get lost in the stories.

Moderator: what is most appealing to your favorite exhibits?

15


#3: Well my most favorite exhibit is the newest one, the STEM center. It’s fun, inviting and interactive, really allows kids to just run around a bit and explore, which is something I thought this place lacked when I first visited.

#5: The guys in my unit were here for that STEM opening and I heard a lot of the same things.

#2: I know we talked about balance, but I really like the WWII presentation, especially with it’s placement after the boot camp and originations of the Seabees exhibit.

Moderator: With the permanent galleries aside, what topics would you like to cover with the temporary ones?

#2: I’ve always wanted to fun things with the temporary ones…like the Seabee Queen. I think we’re still planning on doing it, just that it took to the back burner when our two newest exhibits were being planned out.

#1: I think fun things like that, or even a look at pop culture; there have been a lot of entertainment things we could include, and even USO show artifacts in the collection. It would really speak to the new generations, since the permanent galleries already speak to the older ones.

#4: Well as the young buck in this group [group laughter], I’d like to see fun things like that Seabee Queen idea – well, I know my wife sure would.

#5: I think something physical for the younger males – where you can lift things, build, climb; that’s all part of what we do. And it’s fun, might even put it outside in that fountain area where there’s room.

#2: Oh, I like that. It’s not something I see being only temporary, but it’s certainly something to consider for future building projects…a sort of STEM center, but for older patrons than the youth groups targeted for the STEM centers.

#3: A jungle gym for adults.

[group laughter]

#1: But we also need to consider our public programming because that also gets people interested in the museum.

Moderator: Great point; jumped a little ahead of me actually, but yeah. As the education specialist, how satisfied are you with the public education programs?

#1: It’s ben a few month but I think we’ve got a great start with our education programs; they give the staff an outlet to share their work and how it contributes to the museum.

16


#3: I thought the last lecture on the American Revolution was oddly rather interesting. It wasn’t so stuffy, which is the perception I think people have with presentations at a museum.

Moderator: Can you elaborate on this perception?

#3: Well it’s not really surprising that the younger visitors find the idea of ‘lectures’ [stressed] at a museum a bit – stiff.

#1: that’s a nice way to put it. But that’s also why I think the new stuff we have in the museum will help, especially the STEM center.

Moderator: What part do you think communications plays in that?

#2: It’s important to ensure that our communications reflect what we do here.

#1: Which, so far, I think does. We seem to hit all the right channels from what I could tell. We’re on social media and have a blog that everyone contributes to and shares their work.

#5: We share a lot of the posts in our unit – our commander likes the historical stuff and encourages us to visit the museum.

#4: The online stuff is great, but we can’t forget the older stuff like the newspapers. I mean, how many times have we brought up the local paper’s lack of mentioning our events?

#2: Yeah, I think we’re always hearing about it from our retired vets about how much they feel ignored and the communications from the museum should help with that.

Moderator: so for clarification, the online communications are hitting the right marks, but traditional channels like the local media are lacking?

#4: I’d agree with that.

Moderator: Are there any other things that you feel need to be addressed with regard to improving museum offerings or communications?

[No answer]

Moderator: Well thank you all for your time.

17

Increasing Patronage at the Seabee Museum Appendix B

SURVEY MONKEY RESULTS & GRAPHICS:

18


19


20


21


22


23


24


25


26

com 615 marketing research_ramirez aramis

Documents