I was puzzled by the name change. In this case, why would you essentially just reorder the words in the name? Yes, the sculpture park is beautiful and unique in the metro Boston area. It is well worth a visit I might add. However, the museum is excellent as well. There was a fascinating exhibition called Drawn to Detail which I saw last fall.
Perhaps, the ICA in Boston is cornering the contemporary art museum “market”, with the recent Shephard Fairey show and before that an Anish Kapoor exhibition. It also has received a lot of attention for its new building and new location on the waterfront in Boston. The deCordova’s name change might be a bid to distinguish itself from the ICA. If that is the case, I am not convinced that re-branding is the answer. But if you are going to re-brand, at least be consistent.
The website uses the new name at the top on the right…
The top of the deCordova home page
and then uses the old name under the History and Mission title.
Bottom of deCordova home page
I must admit that I am skeptical of re-branding efforts because they can be expensive and difficult to quantify. I always want to know the return on investment. But in this case, I think that the deCordova needs to go back to the 4 Ps:
1. Product
2. Pricing
3. Placement
4. Promotion
Their product is contemporary art with a focus on American art, especially from New England. The ICA tends to focus on national and international artists. However, a strong regional focus could be an asset at a time when people are enjoying localvore cuisine and taking staycations.
Their pricing, in this case admission fees, is slightly less than the ICA – $12 versus $15 for general admission. In addition, general admission is $5 less than at the MFA.
Placement is where I see the greatest challenge faced by the deCordova. They are located in Lincoln, MA, a suburban, almost exurban town West of Boston. You don’t just drop by the deCordova as you might the ICA. Further, the closest form of public transportation is probably the commuter rail station in Lincoln Center. Thus, they tend to attract visitors for whom the deCordova is the destination. I am reminded of the Barnes Foundation and the fight over moving the collection into Philadelphia, PA in order to attract more visitors.
In terms of promotion, a very unscientific sample suggests that they receive less national attention than the ICA. However, national coverage may not be necessary to gain the attention of their target audience. Their current exhibition was covered by a local NPR station recently.
The deCordova should play to its strengths and recognize their core “customers”. Because of their location, they will not be able to attract some of the same visitors as the ICA. However, suburbanites, families, and art-lovers will be thrilled with what the deCordova has to offer. Unlike the ICA, the deCordova has a sculpture park to be admired by adults and children alike. You can picnic in the park or use the walk between sculptures to work off some excess energy. There is a hands on area, The Art ExperienCenter, that is perfect for inquisitive little (and maybe not so little) hands. In addition, their exhibitions change regularly and there are often opportunities to hear artists talk about their work. Finally, there is free parking. I hate to admit it but it is nice to have.
Through surveys or focus groups, the deCordova could learn or confirm what its current visitors and members value most and use that information to shape its marketing, particularly its acquisition strategy. The challenges faced by the deCordova and many other arts organizations in this tough economic climate require more than a just a name change.
