IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/poicbe/v12y2018i1p446-456n40.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Untaping the potential of strategic partnerships with the stakeholders in museums – a managerial approach

Author

Listed:
  • Ilie Cosmin

    (“Dunarea de Jos” University of Galati, Romania)

Abstract

The strong emphasis on achieving excellence in the services the museums provide to its target public opens a new road to an area that is not characteristic of traditional museology, namely the journey of innovation. This road to innovation has two pillars: a mature knowledge-based strategy (in response to identified needs of target groups) and the ability to provide education (according to identified needs). Both components are totally dependent on visitors, their needs and their personal or collective experiences. This paper addresses these pillars, considering that education is not a mere accumulation of knowledge, but how the visitor experiences, interacts and learns during his visit. Using the literature review as research methodology, this paper aims to analyze the stakeholders of a museum and to assess their partnerships with other museums, by highlighting the clear advantages of stakeholder involvement in the management system of the museum. The main results shows that museums, as cultural organizations, are a brick at the foundation of economic development in many cities. The involvement and support of the stakeholders is essential for a museum that wants to set and meet appropriate community service goals. Understanding stakeholder`s value is important for effective reporting on the performance of the museum, which transforms and translates through continuous public support for the museum.

Suggested Citation

  • Ilie Cosmin, 2018. "Untaping the potential of strategic partnerships with the stakeholders in museums – a managerial approach," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 446-456, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:poicbe:v:12:y:2018:i:1:p:446-456:n:40
    DOI: 10.2478/picbe-2018-0040
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/picbe-2018-0040
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/picbe-2018-0040?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eva Vicente & Carmen Camarero & María José Garrido, 2012. "Insights into Innovation in European Museums," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 649-679, June.
    2. Richard A. Wolfe & Daniel S. Putler, 2002. "How Tight Are the Ties that Bind Stakeholder Groups?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 64-80, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cunningham, George B., 2010. "Understanding the under-representation of African American coaches: A multilevel perspective," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 395-406, November.
    2. Paulin Gohoungodji & Nabil Amara, 2023. "Art of innovating in the arts: definitions, determinants, and mode of innovation in creative industries, a systematic review," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(8), pages 2685-2725, November.
    3. Benjamin Neville & Simon Bell & Gregory Whitwell, 2011. "Stakeholder Salience Revisited: Refining, Redefining, and Refueling an Underdeveloped Conceptual Tool," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 357-378, September.
    4. Viveros, Hector, 2017. "Unpacking stakeholder mechanisms to influence corporate social responsibility in the mining sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-12.
    5. Graciela Corral de Zubielqui & Howard Harris, 2024. "Why the COVID-19 Crisis Is an Ethical Issue for Business: Evidence from the Australian JobKeeper Initiative," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 190(1), pages 123-136, February.
    6. Elise Perrault, 2017. "A ‘Names-and-Faces Approach’ to Stakeholder Identification and Salience: A Matter of Status," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 146(1), pages 25-38, November.
    7. Oluyomi A. Osobajo & David Moore, 2017. "Who is Who? Identifying the Different Sub-groups of Secondary Stakeholders within a Community: A Case Study of the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria Communities," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(9), pages 188-209, September.
    8. Pop, Izabela Luiza & Alexa, Tiberiu, 2016. "Folosirea inovaţiilor tehnologice pentru creşterea accesibilității şi atractivităţii patrimoniului muzeal [The use of technological innovation for increasing the museum heritage accessibility and a," MPRA Paper 78611, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Michel Ferrary, 2019. "The structure and dynamics of the CEO's “small world” of stakeholders. An application to industrial downsizing," Post-Print hal-03214823, HAL.
    10. Subhasis Ray, 2021. "Identification of Research Paradigms for Managing the Cricketing Ecosystem Using Stakeholder Analysis and Text Mining," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 46(3), pages 289-312, August.
    11. Del Bosco, Barbara & Misani, Nicola, 2011. "Keeping the enemies close: The contribution of corporate social responsibility to reducing crime against the firm," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 87-98, March.
    12. Yves Fassin, 2010. "A Dynamic Perspective in Freeman’s Stakeholder Model," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 39-49, August.
    13. Christine A. Riordan & Alexander M. Kowalski, 2021. "From Bread and Roses to #MeToo: Multiplicity, Distance, and the Changing Dynamics of Conflict in IR Theory," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 74(3), pages 580-606, May.
    14. Cedric Dawkins, 2014. "The Principle of Good Faith: Toward Substantive Stakeholder Engagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 283-295, May.
    15. Karan Sonpar & Federica Pazzaglia & Jurgita Kornijenko, 2010. "The Paradox and Constraints of Legitimacy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 1-21, August.
    16. Ali M. Shahzad & Matthew A. Rutherford & Mark P. Sharfman, 2016. "Stakeholder‐Centric Governance and Corporate Social Performance: A Cross‐National Study," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 100-112, March.
    17. Rodriguez Serna, Lil & Nakandala, Dilupa & Bowyer, Dorothea, 2022. "Stakeholder identification and prioritization: The attribute of dependency," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 444-455.
    18. Quaglione, Davide & Cassetta, Ernesto & Crociata, Alessandro & Marra, Alessandro & Sarra, Alessandro, 2019. "An assessment of the role of cultural capital on sustainable mobility behaviours: Conceptual framework and empirical evidence," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 24-34.
    19. Irene Henriques & Sanjay Sharma, 2005. "Pathways of stakeholder influence in the Canadian forestry industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(6), pages 384-398, November.
    20. Andrew Crane & Trish Ruebottom, 2011. "Stakeholder Theory and Social Identity: Rethinking Stakeholder Identification," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 77-87, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:poicbe:v:12:y:2018:i:1:p:446-456:n:40. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.