What is the nature of innovation in the museum context? The existing literature gives quite opposite answers. The technology-oriented view tends to regard innovation in narrative content, which is close to the mainstream viewpoint that the essence of innovation is something relevant to the creation, application and diffusion of technologies and knowledge; and the number of R&D activities fundamentally affect the opportunities for technological innovation within a specific context (e.g. firm, industry, region, nation or global), which in turn determines the outputs of innovation and its performance (Becheikh et al. 2006).
Similarly, Camarero and her colleagues argue that the most common innovation in museums is “changes in certain service aspects and advances in the technology used” (Camarero et al. 2011). Innovative activities in museums are, to some extent, equal to the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) (Corte et al. 2011; Costa Barbosa 2013) on the purpose of improving exhibitions and scenography, making the museum more accessible to a wider audience, and attracting funds from donors and sponsors as well (Camarero & Garrido 2012). In some sense, technology itself becomes a synonym of innovation in the museum setting in the digital era.
Differently, the culture-oriented view emphasizes the artistic and cultural properties of innovation by cultural organizations. The conventional definition of innovation cannot be applied in the museum sector and instead, a new definition should be developed. For example, Noble (1989) asserted that:
“It would be most inappropriate to attempt to apply definitions of innovation which focus almost exclusively on invention, new technology and commercial application in the marketplace to museums. Museums do not manufacture or market goods or products. Museums are not research centers devoted to the development of new technologies. Museums are service organizations. The field of social work provides a set of basic objectives that are not dissimilar to those found in a museum setting. The use of exhibits as a means of mass interpretation and education, as well as
the activities of museum education departments in terms of promoting new techniques, new ideas, and promoting new programs” (Noble 1989) Here, Noble distinguished museum innovation from innovation in manufacturing and other business sectors in terms of the nature of organization, but he also emphasized the possibility to redefine innovation in a museum setting because of the similarity in the diffusion of novelty in accordance with the objective of the organization.
Castañer and Campos (2002) referred in particular to innovation in art organizations by artistic innovation, which was defined as the introduction in the field (or market) of the newness of artistic outputs by the three referents of cosmopolitan, local, and individual perspectives. They can be further classified into two categories of content innovation – repertoire innovation as the programming of contemporary works, as well as form innovation – the new form of presenting both old and new works.
More recently, Castañer (2014) extended the scope of artistic innovation in cultural organizations and develeped the concept of cultural innovation, referring to “innovations in the goods or services offered by a cultural organization” with particular relation to repertoire or programming innovation. He also pointed out that most of the cultural innovations were adopted externally rather than generated internally in the cultural organizations, thus reducing the uncertainty greatly in the process of innovation (Castañer 2014).
Generally, most of the existing literature focuses on technological innovation. Not until very recently have some cultural economics scholars developed the concept of culture-related innovation. Their arguments can inspire us to understand artistic and cultural innovation by arts and cultural organizations beyond the technological dimension. But the definitions of both artistic and cultural innovation are closely associated with repertoire and programming because of their focus on theaters. This seems too narrative for us to cover the features of innovative activities involved in museums, because programming is essentially a managerial means of content innovation adopted externally by theaters (Castañer & Campos 2002; Castañer 2014) whilst most of the content innovations – exhibition, educational programs, collection catalogue
exhibitions that a museum introduces from outside are generated by other museums too. Therefore, these definitions should be revised if they are applied in the museum context.
Culture-oriented innovation is also viewed from the development of cultural products and services. Product development in museums can be regarded as product innovation, which is “linked to providing new services, activities and improvements or variations in exhibited works” (Garrido & Camarero 2010); it, meanwhile, also refers to “extending the artform” and “value creation” (Bakhshi & Throsby 2010). Bakhshi and Throsby (2010) stated that “extending the artform” is a particular aspect of innovation relating to the development of new work that may influence artistic trends and lead to new artistic directions whist “innovation in value creation” means new ways of expanding cultural values of the arts not only in terms of economic profit but also by a wider range of community benefits so as to meet the needs of both visitors and society at large.
Bakhshi and Throsby’s conception of cultural-oriented innovation is widely cited in museum innovation literature. But it needs to be mentioned that their findings are based on the case study of the Tate Gallery – one of the top art museums in England and the world, it is doubtful whether such findings are universal enough to be applied to the museum community as a whole, especially considering that a majority of museums in Europe are small and local museums (Vicente et al. 2012). A counter-example is that most history museums and ancient and classic art museums like the Louvre and el Prado may not innovate in extending the artform because they hardly collect or exhibit any avant-garde artworks.