The Impact of Museum Displays: Improving the Evaluation of Permanent Exhibitions

Museums do not routinely evaluate their permanent displays. These are the areas most visited by audiences, but there is little work undertaken to determine their impact. Museum industry standards have no requirement for evaluating them; funders, including the government, show little interest. This thesis aims to determine the factors that influence current evaluation practice in the UK, to establish the improvements needed to increase the applicability of evaluation to permanent displays, and to examine how the provision of improved resources can increase the understanding of the impact of museum exhibitions. A literature review demonstrates that there is a disconnect between evaluation and research, with the latter viewed as academic and the former as more practical. Multiple heritage organisations have created evaluation toolkits, but an analysis of these proves they are not focussed on exhibitions and recommend methods that do not provide robust results. Sector-specific courses are expensive and inaccessible. In response, this research has fed into a suite of Impact Evaluation Resources and training materials, and tests the applicability of these in museums, particularly on permanent displays. The research was undertaken in the museums of the University of Cambridge, which encompass venues of varied sizes and subject matter. It uses a qualitative methodology, foregrounding pragmatism, which was essential as the data collection took place during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of interviews with eight museum staff members are analysed using Grounded Theory, while reflective autoethnography incorporates the experience and perspective of an established museum professional. The research concludes with the practical application of the resources in training and reporting to funders to demonstrate the impact of permanent displays.