If you look at the family memberships at most museums, they assume a family means two adults and children. And for a logical reason: based on our client work, our latest study among children’s museum core visitors and members, and US Census analysis, we estimate that 90% of core visitors with children are married.
But a third of US households with children are headed by single parents. That’s a big gap – and a gap that is growing wider by the day. Since single parents also tend to have lower levels of income and educational attainment, and are more likely to be minorities, the gap becomes more troubling.
This gap has been on our minds for a while, so a comment in that recent study of children’s museum core visitor really stood out for us:
“Unfortunately, we will discontinue our membership when it expires because they no longer offer a [membership] for 2 people. I am NOT willing to purchase a family membership – at double the price . . . I am a single mom, only [one] income, and only one child. We will not be able to purchase a Supporting membership (4 people). This makes me sad.”
Professionals in the museum field talk a lot about attracting more diverse audiences, and having difficulties finding the levers to better attract them. But are we also setting up barriers when we don’t consider the financial challenges many families do have that put visitation and membership out of reach?
Maybe we need to look at our admissions packages and membership levels, and think about how families that don’t fit that traditional model of two parents + children might fit in. Can we make these packages and membership more flexible? Can we do it in a way that is fair to families of all shapes and sizes, but not in a way that is likely to be abused by those seeking an even better bargain (that is, we don’t want families headed by two parents to choose only one parent to put on the membership . . . we want both parents to visit!).
We are not suggesting that changing membership levels will instantaneously draw more diverse audiences to a museum. It takes much more than that. But breaking down barriers that we have imposed ourselves, albeit unwittingly, is a good step in the right direction.
This post, which touches on admission fees as well, is a perfect segue to a new series of posts we’ll be running in the next few weeks, based on a quick survey we conducted last winter on attendance trends. We’ll be coming back to our latest research on meaningful museum experiences later in the summer.
What do you think? Simply click on “comments” below to share your thoughts (and if you are reading this from your e-mail subscription, go to our blog to comment).
If you look at the family memberships at most museums, they assume a family means two adults and children. And for a logical reason: based on our client work, our latest study among children’s museum core visitors and members, and US Census analysis, we estimate that 90% of core visitors with children are married.
But a third of US households with children are headed by single parents. That’s a big gap – and a gap that is growing wider by the day.
Since single parents tend to have lower levels of income and educational attainment, and are more likely to be minorities, the gap becomes more troubling.
This gap has been on our minds for a while, so a comment in that recent study of children’s museum core visitor really stood out for us:
If you look at the family memberships at most museums, they assume a family means two adults and children. And for a logical reason: based on our client work, our latest study among children’s museum core visitors and members, and US Census analysis, we estimate that 90% of core visitors with children are married.
But a third of US households with children are headed by single parents. That’s a big gap – and a gap that is growing wider by the day.
Since single parents tend to have lower levels of income and educational attainment, and are more likely to be minorities, the gap becomes more troubling.
This gap has been on our minds for a while, so a comment in that recent study of children’s museum core visitor really stood out for us:
“Unfortunately, we will discontinue our membership when it expires because they no longer offer a [membership] for 2 people. I am NOT willing to purchase a family membership – at double the price . . . I am a single mom, only [one] income, and only one child. We will not be able to purchase a Supporting membership (4 people). This makes me sad.”
Professionals in the museum field talk a lot about attracting more diverse audiences, and having difficulties finding the levers to better attract them. But are we also setting up barriers when we don’t consider the financial challenges LINK TO CENSUS POST many families do have that put visitation and membership out of reach?
Maybe we need to look at our admissions packages and membership levels, and think about how families that don’t fit that traditional model of two parents + children might fit in. Can we make these packages and membership more flexible? Can we do it in a way that is fair to families of all shapes and sizes, but not in a way that is likely to be abused by those seeking an even better bargain (that is, we don’t want families headed by two parents to choose only one parent to put on the membership . . . we want both parents to visit!).
We are not suggesting that changing membership levels will instantaneously draw more diverse audiences to a museum. It takes much more than that. But breaking down barriers that we have imposed ourselves (albeit unwittingly) is a good step in the right direction.
This post, which touches on admission fees as well, is a perfect segue to a new series of posts we’ll be running in the next few weeks, based on a quick survey we conducted last winter on attendance trends. We’ll be coming back to our latest research on meaningful museum experiences later in the summer.
What do you think?
“Unfortunately, we will discontinue our membership when it expires because they no longer offer a [membership] for 2 people. I am NOT willing to purchase a family membership – at double the price . . . I am a single mom, only [one] income, and only one child. We will not be able to purchase a Supporting membership (4 people). This makes me sad.”
Professionals in the museum field talk a lot about attracting more diverse audiences, and having difficulties finding the levers to better attract them. But are we also setting up barriers when we don’t consider the financial challenges LINK TO CENSUS POST many families do have that put visitation and membership out of reach?
Maybe we need to look at our admissions packages and membership levels, and think about how families that don’t fit that traditional model of two parents + children might fit in. Can we make these packages and membership more flexible? Can we do it in a way that is fair to families of all shapes and sizes, but not in a way that is likely to be abused by those seeking an even better bargain (that is, we don’t want families headed by two parents to choose only one parent to put on the membership . . . we want both parents to visit!).
We are not suggesting that changing membership levels will instantaneously draw more diverse audiences to a museum. It takes much more than that. But breaking down barriers that we have imposed ourselves (albeit unwittingly) is a good step in the right direction.
This post, which touches on admission fees as well, is a perfect segue to a new series of posts we’ll be running in the next few weeks, based on a quick survey we conducted last winter on attendance trends. We’ll be coming back to our latest research on meaningful museum experiences later in the summer.
What do you think?
As a single parent and the director of a small museum, I think museums need to consider customizing family memberships. Perhaps a base membership price for two family members with an incremental increase in price for each additional family member. This way museums can recognize (and attract) the diversity of families today- a three person family membership might include one parent, one child and a grandparent.
Thanks for your research! Every post has something that leaves me thinking about my own institution and the larger museum field.
Posted by: Michelle Stahl | June 28, 2012 at 08:42 PM
This is timely. I am just about to sit down with our Marketing Trustee and this is now on the agenda. Thank you.
Posted by: Dartmouth Museum | June 29, 2012 at 08:49 AM
I do agree with your post and in fact, would like to add a comment about something I saw during focus groups I recently ran —grandparents who either have custody of their grandchildren, or who are responsible for taking care of them for a good part of the time. While certainly not the majority of my focus group participants, I was nevertheless surprised at the number of 50 somethings who take an active role in their grandchild(s) upbringing. I had 8 focus groups, and I think I had at least one in each group who fell into that category. And they are very concerned about finding age appropriate activities for their kids, they want substantive activities, want their grandkids to learn something, but as one woman put it-‘when I found out it would have cost me $50 to bring me and my grandson to the science center, we opted instead to go to the bounce house where admission was just $5. It wasn’t as educational as I would have liked, but my grandson had a good time’
Oh, and another interesting thing I saw-I had a couple-maybe 4 or 5 of the 69 participants, who were young, in their 20’s, but they enjoy taking nieces and nephews -or even their friends kids, on outings. One young man remarked that it made for a good excuse to come to the science center, as if he needed to have that child with him to justify coming.
Posted by: Kim Hunter | June 29, 2012 at 12:14 PM
Great post! This is something that we have struggled with for the past couple of years. We currently have very traditional membership categories - Household (2a, with up to 4c), Individual, Grandparent(s), and Senior Individual.
One option I have been investigating is the "build-your-own" membership option much like what Michelle Stahl mentioned above. Purchasers could customize the membership to their needs. Cards would be issued in the adult name(s) only, with the maximum number of children they are entitled to visit with printed on the card. I haven't fully wrapped my head around all of the details so if anyone if already doing this, weighing in your experience with this would be extremely valuable to many.
Posted by: Fraser McDonald - Canada Science and Technology Museums Corporation | July 03, 2012 at 11:58 AM
As a Museum professional who often visits museums with my sister and her children, I've always been intrigued by the ways in which membership benefits assume the 2 adults should be the parents. What I have done in the past is buy a family membership for her family and then tack on an additional adult. I think we did this most recently at Port Discovery in Baltimore and it worked out well.
Posted by: Lindsey Baker | July 03, 2012 at 01:42 PM
I certainly hope that museums take note of this article and the comments that have been posted too; the American "family" is changing.
This spring we purchased an annual "family pass" from our local science museum. This pass is accepted, via part of a reciprocal agreement, by other museums in our area and surrounding States. The catch? Each museum in that reciprocal arrangement has a different way to define "family". Along with the list of participating museums was a guide to those definitions. Suffice it to say, that those with a narrow 1950's definition of "family" will not be seeing us, nor our granddaughter who we are raising.
Posted by: Dan Crowther | July 05, 2012 at 05:08 PM
Thanks everyone for your comments. Yes, the American family is changing, and since every family defines themselves differently, we have to be the flexible ones to figure out how to accommodate them, instead of forcing families into boxes they simply do not fit in.
I love these ideas!
Posted by: Susie Wilkening, Reach Advisors | July 07, 2012 at 12:49 PM
I agree that the definition of family and museum seem to be slow to make changes. I am a 2 parent 1 child family but what bothered me in the article is this statement:
"Can we do it in a way that is fair to families of all shapes and sizes, but not in a way that is likely to be abused by those seeking an even better bargain (that is, we don’t want families headed by two parents to choose only one parent to put on the membership . . . we want both parents to visit"
The fact that you would call this abuse. really? My husband works all day 6 days a week and the only time I can bring my son to museums is during the week as we have lots of commitments on the weekends. Yes occasionally we could go to a museum on the weekend as a family but when my usband works 6 days a week he really would rather just stay at home and do stuff arond the house.
The other thing that bothers me at my local museum in South eastern CT. The membership is about $100 and then for EVERY event members have to pay $9 for each person (parent and child) ($15 for non members) I am sorry but that is a lot of money. I understand you are a non profit and need to make money to run the programs but that is just ridiculous what is the point of the membership? So I can save $6 each time I go. Well I am just not going to be going that many times to make it worth it. And as a non member I am not going to pay $30 for my son to go there for a few hours once in a while. It is just not that good a museum but they charge admission rates as if it is the greatest museum.
Posted by: Lisa | July 12, 2012 at 02:00 PM