Skip to main content

Performance Measurement and Evaluation in the Arts and Cultural Sector: State-of-the-Art in Theory and Practice and Prolegomena for Further Developments

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Management, Participation and Entrepreneurship in the Cultural and Creative Sector

Abstract

This chapter discusses the (often uncontested) underlying conceptualisations of performance evaluation inherent to the positivist paradigm. It problematises the origins and development of the field of evaluation and scrutinises the limits of performance measurement and evaluation as currently applied to the cultural and creative sector. Drawing on a systematic literature review, data analysis and empirical material in the context of institutional and temporary cultural organisations, we analyse political, organisational and artistic practices in relation to performance measurement, evaluation and sense-making. We first look at how performance is understood, measured and politically instrumentalised in major temporary cultural events, elaborating on the case of the European Capitals of Culture. In particular, we address issues of participation and sustainability. Next, by drawing on an ethnographic study of long-standing arts organisations in Vienna and Berlin, we analyse how performance itself is enacted and embedded in the artistic processes of the institutionalised performing arts. We then show how the artistic dimension of organisational performance can be more responsibly and holistically represented in evaluation practices. Our analysis reflects on the status quo of performance measurement and evaluation in the arts and cultural sector and the challenges associated with the current practices, which have been heavily influenced by positivist thinking in cultural policy and arts management research. Finally, we offer avenues for further developments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In the United States only about 13 percent of direct arts support comes from public funding and only 9 percent from the federal government. The rest comes from earned revenue and private funders. That is, the large proportion of arts funding is ‘indirect’ in terms of tax deductibility of gifts for nonprofits. For every dollar of direct support, the US government provides about $14 of indirect support. Hence, arts and cultural organisations in the US place more emphasis on individual contributions and fundraising.

  2. 2.

    For detailed information on the methodological approach and empirical findings, see Labaronne (2019a).

  3. 3.

    According to cultural economists, a ‘long-run’ situation is a period over which the number of performances can be varied, meaning resources can be reconfigured. Because ‘the season’ is the planning unit for most nonprofit performing arts organisations, it is the appropriate indicator for the long-run situation (Heilbrun and Gray 2001, p. 128). By contrast, in a ‘short-run’ situation (e.g., a single performance), the levels of resource usage tend to be more fixed.

References

  • Abfalter, D. (2010). Das Unmessbare messen? [Measuring the unmeasurable?]. Wiesbaden: VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abma, T., & Widdershoven, G. (2011). Evaluation as relationally responsible practice. In N. K. Denkin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alhaddi, H. (2015). Triple bottom line and sustainability: A literature review. Business and Management Studies, 1(2), 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, H. (1982). Art worlds. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belfiore, E., & Bennett, O. (2010). Beyond the ‘toolkit approach’: Arts impact evaluation research and the realities of cultural policy making. Journal for Cultural Research, 14(2), 121–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biehl-Missal, B. (2017). Dance and organisation. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biondi, L., Demartini, P., Marchegiani, L., Marchiori, M., & Piber, M. (2020). Understanding orchestrated participatory cultural initiatives: Mapping the dynamics of governance and participation. Cities, 96, in publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boerner, S. (2004). Artistic quality in an opera company: Toward the development of a concept. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 14(4), 25–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boerner, S., & Renz, S. (2008). Performance measurement in opera companies: Comparing the subjective quality judgements of experts and non-experts. International Journal of Arts Management, 10(3), 21–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, A. C. (2000). The ‘income gap’ and the health of arts nonprofits. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 10(3), 271–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, M., Milne, C., & Johansson, K. (2002). Using stakeholder research in the evaluation of organisational performance. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 2(1), 20–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cairs, B., Harris, M., Hutchinson, R., & Tricker, M. (2004). Improving performance? The adoption and implementation of quality systems in UK nonprofits. Paper presented at the 33rd annual ARNOVA conference, Los Angeles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practice guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiaravalloti, F. (2016). Performance evaluation in the arts. Groningen: University of Groningen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiaravalloti, F., & Piber, M. (2011). Ethical implications of methodological settings in arts management research: The case of performance evaluation. Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 41(4), 240–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahler-Larsen, P. (2012). The evaluation society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.). (2011). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeVereaux, C. (2017). The dust of everyday life. Proceedings of the 13th conference of the European Sociological Association: (Un)Making Europe: Capitalism, Solidarities, Subjectivities, Athens.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickie, G. (1984). The art circle: A theory of art. New York: Haven.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theory from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Union. (2006). Decision No 1622/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 2006. Official Journal of the European Union, L 304/1.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Union. (2014). Decision No 445/2014/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014. Official Journal of the European Union, L 132/1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finocchiaro, M., & Rizzo, I. (2009). Performance measurement of heritage conservation activity in Sicily. International Journal of Arts Management, 11(2), 29–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). Case study. In N. K. Denkin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 301–316). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, T., & Rampton, J. (2016, November). Ex-post evaluation of the 2015 European Capitals of Culture. Final Report. Ecorys and the Centre for Strategy and Evaluation Services (CSES). Accessed October 30, 2019, from https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/creative-europe/sites/creative-europe/files/ecoc-2015-evaluation_en.pdf

  • Garcia, B., & Cox, T. (2013). European Capitals of Culture: Success strategies and long-term effects. Directorate-General for Internal Policies, European Parliament. Accessed July 3, 2019, from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2013/513985/IPOL-CULT_ET(2013)513985_EN.pdf

  • Gstraunthaler, T., & Piber, M. (2012). The performance of museums and other cultural institutions: Numbers or genuine judgements? International Studies of Management & Organization, 42(3), 29–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habersam, M. & Piber, M. (2020). The Impact of Participation and Active Citizenship: Evaluative Approaches in Three Recent ECOC-Projects. Paper submitted for the IFKAD-conference/Rome 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadida, A. (2015). Performance in the creative industries. In C. Jones, M. Lorenzen, & J. Sapsed (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of creative industries (pp. 219–247). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M., & Tayler, B. (2019, September–October). Don’t let metrics undermine your business. Harvard Business Review. Accessed November 12, 2019, from https://hbr.org/2019/09/dont-let-metrics-undermine-your-business

  • Heilbrun, J., & Gray, C. (2001). The economics of art and culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kong, E. (2007). The strategic importance of intellectual capital in the non-profit sector. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 8(4), 721–731.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krug, K., & Weinberg, C. (2004). Mission, money, and merit: strategic decision making by nonprofit managers. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 7(2), 119–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labaronne, L. (2017). Performance measurement and evaluation in arts management: A meta-synthesis. Journal of Cultural Management: Arts, Economics, Policy, 3(1), 37–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labaronne, L. (2019a). A resource-oriented approach to performing arts organizations: An ethnographic study of dance companies. Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 49(4), 242–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labaronne, L. (2019b). (Re)-presenting artistic performance: A contextualized for evaluating the performing arts. PhD diss., Zeppelin University, Friedrichshafen, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marotto, M., Roos, J., & Bart, I. V. (2007). Collective virtuosity in organizations: A study of peak performance in an orchestra. Journal of Management Studies, 44(3), 388–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mertens, D. (1998). Research methods in education and psychology: Integration diversity with quantitative and qualitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2018). Principles-focused evaluation. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulus, O. (2003). Measuring museum performance: A study of museums in France and the United States. International Journal of Arts Management, 6(1), 50–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990, May–June). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 79–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radbourne, J., Glow, H., Johanson, K., & White, T. (2009). The audience experience: Measuring quality in the performing arts. International Journal of Arts Management, 11(3), 16–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rampton, J., Mozuraityte, N., Andersson, H., & Reincke, E. (2012). Ex-post evaluation of 2011 European Capitals of Culture. Final Report for the European Commission. ECORYS. Accessed October 30, 2019, from https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/creative-europe/sites/creative-europe/files/files/ecoc-2011-evaluation_en.pdf

  • Rossi, P., Lipsey, M., & Freeman, H. (2004). Evaluation. A systematic approach. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schober, C., Rauscher, O., & Millner, R. (2012). Evaluation und Wirkungsmessung [Evaluation and impact measurement]. In R. Simsa, M. Meyer, & C. Badelt (Eds.), Handbuch der Nonprofit-Organisation [Compendium of the nonprofit-organizations] (pp. 451–470). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staatsballett Berlin. (2017). Press kit season 2017/2018. Internal document.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stockmann, R. (2010a). Rolle der evaluation in der Gesellschaft [The role of evaluation in modern society]. In R. Stockmann & W. Meyer (Eds.), Evaluation: Eine Einführung [An introduction to evaluation] (pp. 15–52). Opladen: Verlag Barbara Budrich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stockmann, R. (2010b). Wissenschaftsbasierte Evaluationt [Research-based evaluation]. In R. Stockmann & W. Meyer (Eds.), Evaluation: Eine Einführung [An introduction to evaluation] (pp. 55–89). Opladen: Verlag. Barbara Budrich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stockmann, R., & Hennefeld, V. (2013). Evaluation in Kultur und Kulturpolitik. Eine Bestandsaufnahme. Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stockmann, R., & Meyer, W. (Eds.). (2010). Evaluation: Eine Einführung [An introduction to evaluation]. Opladen: Verlag Barbara Budrich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Svensson, J. (2017). Evaluation am theater [Evaluation in theatres]. Journal of Cultural Management: Arts, Economics, Policy, 3(1), 113–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Throsby, C. D. (1990). Perception of quality in demand for the theatre. Journal of Cultural Economics, 14(1), 65–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Towse, R. (2001). Quis custodiet? Or, managing the management: The case of the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden. International Journal of Arts Management, 3(3), 38–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turbide, J., & Laurin, C. (2009). Performance measurement in the arts sector: The case of the performing arts. International Journal of Arts Management, 11(2), 56–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valletta. (2019). The impacts of the European Capital of Culture – Final Research Report. Valletta. In: https://valletta2018.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Final-Report-2018.pdf [2.10.2019].

  • Zembylas, T. (2014). Artistic practices: Social interactions and cultural dynamics. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Piber .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix

Appendix

Characteristics of the selected case studies (the case of the performing arts)

Case study

Vienna state ballet

Berlin state ballet

Organisation Type

Large classical dance company. Autonomous entity under public law.

Large classical dance company. Autonomous entity under public law.

History and Reputation

The history of the Viennese ballet spans nearly 400 years. Among the artists who have worked in Vienna are legends such as Marie Taglioni and Rudolf Nureyev.

Austria’s biggest ensemble.

The tradition of the Staatsballett Berlin dates back to 1742, when Frederick the Great founded his royal court opera.

Germany’s largest company and Berlin’s only classically trained ensemble.

Repertoire

Classic repertoire with neoclassical and modern pieces.

Traditional story ballets with increasingly contemporary works.

Performance Venues (self-owned)

Wiener Staatsoper, Volksoper Wien

Deutsche Oper Berlin, Komische Oper Berlin, Staatsoper Unter den Linden

Funding

Approx. 60% direct subsidies (federal and civic)

Approx. 40% self-earned revenue (box office and fundraising)

Approx. 70% direct subsidies (federal and civic)

Approx. 30% self-earned revenue (box office and fundraising)

Ensemble

100 dancers (first soloists, soloists, demi-soloists and corps de ballet)

94 dancers (first soloists, soloists, demi-soloists, corps de ballet and character roles)

Season

Around 87 performances, including 3 full-length premieres, 10 revivals of repertoire pieces and 1 international gala

Around 88 performances, including 4 full-length premieres, 8 revivals of repertoire pieces and 1 international gala

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Labaronne, L., Piber, M. (2020). Performance Measurement and Evaluation in the Arts and Cultural Sector: State-of-the-Art in Theory and Practice and Prolegomena for Further Developments. In: Piber, M. (eds) Management, Participation and Entrepreneurship in the Cultural and Creative Sector. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46796-8_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics