Carol Scott

Value is at the heart of museums

Our missions embody core values- our purpose, our reason for being.  We use our resources to create value for the communities we serve. We connect with audiences through understanding their personal values and the values they share as citizens.  We measure our value to demonstrate the essential public benefits we provide.

This blog is dedicated to the subject of ‘Museums and Value’.  Its aim is to provide a forum for discussion and debate on the many dimensions of value and its place in the work of museums today.


The Cultural Value of Visiting Museums and Galleries

Carol Scott - Sunday, March 22, 2015

This week's blog post comes to you in a different format. 

As part of the AHRC's funded, Cultural Value Project (, myself, Jocelyn Dodd (Research Centre for Museums and Galleries, University of Leicester) and Richard Sandell (Professor of Museum Studies, University of Leicester) undertook a critical review of 20 years of literature to identify how users describe their museum and gallery experiences and to what extent these experiences make a difference to the public realm.

The outcomes of this project were presented at a research forum held at the University of Leicester on the 25th February 2015. The session is available on youtube and is divided into three sections:

- An introduction to the session

- My presentation on the research, concluding with three provocations

- The discussion that followed. 

The link is here. 

Cultural Value of Engaging with Museums and Galleries

Carol Scott - Tuesday, March 03, 2015

Last year I worked with Jocelyn Dodd and Richard Sandell from the Museum Studies Department at the University of Leicester. We conducted a critical review of two decades of literature to find out what it could tell us about users’ experience of museums and galleries and what difference those experiences make to individuals and to society. Last week, we met up again at the Leicester University’s Research Centre for Museums and Galleries at to present the findings of the critical review to a lively and diverse audience of museum practitioners.


We described how users’ descriptions often focus on the cognitive processes that they employ to actively engage with encounters in museums. Though positive feelings of well-being were also abundantly evident in the literature, we found that affirming, confirming and inspiring experiences occurred alongside encounters that challenged, confronted and shocked people. And there were myriad descriptions where the main experience was one of connectedness- with place, with difference, with other cultures, with the numinous, luminous and the divine, with cultural identify and with self.


But when we came to the second part of the study- ‘what difference do these experiences make to individuals and to society?’- we found less evidence. In one of my ‘provocations’ last week, I argued that, as a sector, we tend to proceed on the basis of an untested assumption that positive experiences in museum accrue by some process of osmosis to the public realm.


It may be true that the experience in museums does have impact in the public realm-producing well-being in citizens and greater trust in communities. But, as yet, we have little more than evidence from localised case studies. In the absence of longitudinal population studies with user and non-user control groups, it is difficult to argue the case that having museums does ‘make a difference’.


I argue that we need to begin by interrogating existing national data sets (Taking Part, National Household Survey, Measuring National Well-Being) to discover what evidence does exist and what other research we need to undertake to prove our deeply held belief that museums change lives and make a positive difference in the public realm.


If museums create feelings of personal well- being and social connectedness, if active engagement is what we seek to build in our citizens, then we need to bridge the evidence gap between what happens in the museum and what impact it has beyond the walls.

The full report can be found at


Museums and Well-Being

Carol Scott - Thursday, January 22, 2015

The contribution of arts and culture to well-being and good health has been in the news recently.

In an article in the Guardian[1], the Chair of Arts Council England, Sir Peter Bazalgette, argues that the arts have a powerful role to play in increasing health,  easing the pressures on the NHS[2] and potentially saving hundreds of millions of pounds in public health care costs. This theme is further elaborated in the Arts Council England’s January 2015 publication ‘Cultural Activities, artforms and wellbeing[3]’ co-authored by Daniel Fujiwarra and Michael McKerron.

Well-being is associated with life satisfaction, happiness and meaningfulness. But the New Economics Foundation (NEF 2009)[4] has developed a well-being hierarchy which provides greater definition. They distinguish between social and individual wellbeing. In this blog today, I want to focus on personal well-being, which NEF associates with positive feelings such as vitality, self esteem, competence, autonomy, engagement, meaning and purpose.

The good news is that users of museums and galleries (who constitute 52% of the English population)[5] describe their experience in ‘well-being’ terms. In a major critical review as part of the Cultural Value Project[6], Carol Scott of Carol Scott Associates[7] and Prof. Richard Sandell and Jocelyn Dodd from the University of Leicester’s School of Museum Studies, interrogated two decades of UK studies to discover how users described their experiences in museums.

We found that the users describe museums as a well-being experience, one that generates enjoyment, pleasure, stimulation and inspiration. It can be energising and uplifting as well as calming and healing.  In line with the NEF model, museum experiences can make people feel ‘alive’. An enhanced sense of self often results. People describe feelings of personal ‘dignity’, of pride, affirmation, confidence and confidence.  In their own words:


I have always liked art galleries because the atmosphere was calm compared with home.... It has shown me how to chill, I am much more relaxed and well happier! makes me feel alive when I look at art and things. Because I feel like I'm a working, functioning human being...


The first thing I saw, I felt, was- a refugee person can be something in this country -I felt proud of myself.


It’s changed my ideas about myself - I would actually feel capable now of going in and knowing I had something to offer a local group.


So investment in museums and galleries is paying dividends in terms of the quality of the experience and its positive outcomes for users. The next stage is to examine whether individuals’ positive museum experiences accrue to the public realm and result in positive health impacts.

 There are limited, but promising, indications that this is an evidential base worth exploring. In 2010, the Culture and Sport Evidence Programme (CASE) used Taking Part data to determine whether there were positive correlations between sport and cultural participation and subjective well-being. It found in the affirmative (2010, 36) suggesting that a similar analysis of museum and gallery participation could yield useful results towards proving that museums are contributing to the public health of the British population.








[2] National Health Service in the UK


[4] New Economics Foundation (NEF). 2009.




This week, Jim Cullen talks about Public Value in action!

Carol Scott - Tuesday, December 02, 2014

Last summer I was commissioned to work with the Sir Alexander Galt Museum and Archives (The Galt) in Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada on a ‘public value plan’. The Galt is a publicly-owned and funded multi-disciplinary museum and archives focused on the rich history and culture of Lethbridge and Southern Alberta.  

A number of compelling factors present challenges and offer opportunities for The Galt to be of service to the local community in the coming decade. Lethbridge expects ‘boom’ economic growth through oil and gas activity and expanded industrial agriculture. The Galt also expects significantly-increased diversity in its community driven by industrial expansion and growth in urban First Nations, elderly and student populations. How to respond? What public value can The Galt contribute?

A key success factor in our project was The Galt’s ethos. It has an existing commitment to public value principles, a strong track record in community engagement, a passion for telling community stories through a diverse exhibition program and events, and an embedded habit of strategic thinking.  In many ways, The Galt was a dream client for this kind of work!

Carol’s book was our primary source of guidance for a public value-guided ‘mashup’ of my existing strategic planning framework. We were also guided by the Alberta Museums Association Sustainability Working Group’s five ‘Facets of Sustainability[1] and a number of other internationally-published works including AAM’s Trendswatch.

Museum staff began the process with a quick, but robust stakeholder engagement process which focused on each stakeholder’s insights into the direction, needs and issues of the Lethbridge and Southern Alberta community in relation to their own organizations. We distilled this information to find recurring themes across all stakeholders.  Stakeholder feedback, combined with the Galt Planning Team’s own visioning of community trends and issues profoundly informed the plan’s development and content. 

My strategic planning work has long made use of Appreciative Inquiry[2] and ‘SOAR’[3] methods to encourage generative thinking. We found that SOAR worked beautifully with public value concepts. As a Recognized Museum in Alberta, The Galt was already accustomed to rigorous review of its core museum operations and we were able to re-purpose our internal analysis of standard museum functions to focus on the public value capabilities which would be needed to support this fundamental strategic direction. 

The Planning Team reviewed and re-interpreted their existing mission and vision statements through a public value lens and focused on value propositions and community and visitor outcomes.

In the end, we met the project’s scope and timing requirements and developed a strategic plan worthy of this remarkable institution; the plan was approved by the Galt’s Board with few amendments.  It was thrilling to work with such a public value-savvy team and to see how public value thinking could energize and bring vastly greater meaning to the strategic planning process.   As a consultant, my strategic planning process now is driven even more deeply by public value concepts. 

[1] Cultural, Health, Environmental, Financial and Social Sustainability.  See

[2] Cooperrider, Whitney and Stavros, found at:

[3] Strengths, Opportunities, Aspirations, Results.  See

Getting to grips with measuring social impact

Carol Scott - Tuesday, July 29, 2014

Providing evidence that museums create social value is essential for making the case to governments for continued public investment. Now, recent research for the Heritage Lottery Fund finds that social investors are also calling for the cultural heritage sector to ‘get to grips with measuring social impact’ according to Dan Corry, who presented at the recent Heritage Exchange Forum (14-15 July 2014, London).

With public investment in decline, engaging non-public, social investors is becoming imperative. But whether the funding comes from the public or non-public spheres, investors want to know what difference their contribution has made and whether it has achieved what it set out to do. Enter- the concept of ‘impact’ and how to measure it- subjects of long and vigorous discussions in the cultural heritage sector. 

As Korn argues in Museums and Public Value: creating sustainable futures (Scott 2013, 31-43), institutions can more easily measure impact when they plan for the difference they want to make, identify the results they are seeking to achieve and link measures to defined interventions. Individually, museums are starting to think about planning for social change with this intentional aspect in mind.

But what about other social impacts that are not the results of specific institutional planning? Do museums in general create value that accrues to the public realm? If so, where is the evidence and how do we capture it?

Getting to grips with social impact can start with existing data sets and the methods they use to capture evidence. The Taking Part survey, for example, has been collecting data on cultural and sport participation in England since 2005. Managed by the Department of Culture, Media and Sport in partnership with English Heritage, Arts Council England and Sport England, it surveys nationally representative samples of adults and children at regular intervals each year. The data is longitudinal, allowing changes to be tracked over time and comparisons to be made between users and non-users.

For nearly a decade, it has collected baseline data on cultural participation using Subjective Wellbeing (SWB) methods that allow individuals to assign a numeric value to cultural experiences and to self- perceptions of well-being, trust, belonging and influence. Correlations can then be made between cultural participation and its impact on both individual well-being and the presence of other indicators of social capital needed to build healthy communities.

In 2010, Jones (2010, 13) used Taking Part data to test the assumption that the ‘... more individuals participate, the greater the benefit of overall participation to society’. Of particular interest was whether cultural participation has an impact on social capital in communities, specifically on the presence of ‘trust’. The study found that people who engage in cultural activities are 15% more likely to ‘trust’ others than those who do not (Jones 2010, 52). Evidence that participating in cultural activities can have positive impacts which accrue to the public realm is the sort of evidence that public funders and social investors are looking for when we make the case for the importance of cultural heritage.  

Taking Part and the Culture and Sport Evidence programme (CASE) are existing resources that merit our close attention. Our sector can ‘get to grips’ with social impact by mining this data more extensively to find out what other evidence it yields.

 Taking Part:

CASE programme: