Partnering business with the arts

How times have changed for the world’s great museums and galleries. Back in the early 1980s, when underfunding was a chronic complaint, the major British institutions were supported largely from government coffers. Not anymore, reports Faith Glasgow

Over the past couple of decades there has been a sea-change in expectations, attitudes and sources of funding for British museums and galleries. The Tate, for example, is now only about 50% state-funded, with the balance made up from numerous sources ranging from publishing to legacies. Things are changing even in countries such as France, where the state was traditionally almost entirely responsible for museum funding. The Louvre now relies on other sources for more than a third of its income.

Underpinning much of the shift away from government support has been a growth in corporate involvement at various levels. These days, the links between big business and top-drawer art and culture are widely evident in the UK: the Turner Prize is currently sponsored by Gordon’s Gin; investment bank UBS is backing the major rehang of the Tate Modern galleries; Schweppes puts the fizz into the National Portrait Gallery’s annual Photographic Portrait Prize.

Ernst & Young has an astonishing record of visual arts sponsorship spanning 13 years. Jane Phillips, manager, corporate profile at Ernst & Young, notes that the range of art galleries in the UK, particularly London, and Britain’s increasing love for art, has led to an increase in opportunities for sponsorship. “The art world’s sponsorship capability has grown significantly in recent years and many arts organisations are offering highly creative and innovative sponsorship packages. If a business is clear about its objectives, art sponsorship can be a relatively cost effective means of achieving them.”

But high-profile sponsorship is by no means the only option for companies looking for involvement. Firms may fund smaller temporary exhibitions, or contribute to an individual purchase, or sponsor a series of displays in a particular gallery. For example, the British Museum has struck up an innovative three-year relationship with Tokyo newspaper publisher Asahi Shimbun. The displays sponsored by the company are designed to provide a contemporary perspective on the museum’s collection; the current one centres on a Japanese robotic dog.

Other companies take a lower-profile or more practical approach, addressing issues of education, access or IT. Tate & Lyle, for instance, is involved with the Tate’s education programme, providing funding for a weekend “art trolley” offering free activities for children, and also for artists and writers to work creatively with children in local schools. The Louvre too has a number of interesting “back office” supporters. In France, Deloitte and Grant Thornton are patrons of the museum (founding members of the Cercle Louvre Entreprises), and Credit Lyonnais, Accenture and Blue Martini Software all have ongoing involvement with the redevelopment of the museum’s website.

The idea of getting companies to back the visual arts originated several decades ago, in the US. Nina Diefenbach, Vice President for development at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, dates it back to the 1970s, when the Met started organising special exhibitions and touring shows, though Deborah Ziska at the National Gallery of Art in Washington DC reports that corporate support has been a factor throughout the NGA’s 65-year history. In a financial environment where - unlike the UK and Europe - there is generally no guarantee of government, state or city funding from one year to the next, corporate sponsorship, which can be worth anything between $200,000 and $1.5m, is all the more important for US galleries.

Why do profit-driven enterprises consider it worthwhile to give away money (and, increasingly, expertise) in this way? It’s largely to do with building brand awareness and associations. “Corporations tend to focus on special exhibitions because they like the public visibility and the critical acclaim,” Nina Diefenbach observes. “But they are often one-off sponsors, so we are continually researching to find new ones to approach.” Indeed, museums and galleries put a great deal of effort into researching target sponsor companies to find a good “fit” with a particular exhibition.

This can take various forms. “A show focusing on art from a particular country may suggest certain sponsors - for instance, our exhibition on Max Ernst, who was born in Germany, was sponsored by the German pharmaceuticals firm Altana,” continues Diefenbach. “Modern art is always popular with companies who want to be seen as dynamic and cutting-edge. Or there may be cultural links - Dangerous Liaisons, an exhibition of 18th century costumes in a period setting, was backed by Asprey and Condé Nast.”

Innovation

In the UK, similar synergies are sought out. BP’s involvement with the British Museum is long-established, but its sponsorship of the recent 3D Mummy exhibition was particularly appropriate, says Anneke Riftkin of the museum’s corporate development department. “Not only does BP already have operations in Egypt, but the show focuses on the creative use of technology in the museum and what it can tell us about the past, and similar technology is used by BP’s research department, so the association is very much about innovation.”

Ernst & Young’s ongoing relationship with galleries in Britain, particularly the Tate, fulfils the firm’s aim of appealing to a wide audience as well as providing a client hospitality programme. “Key business objectives for us are deepening relationships with our clients and engaging our people,” says Jane Phillips. “We look for exhibitions that will have a major appeal to both of those audiences. For example, our most recent sponsorship was the highly successful TurnerWhistlerMonet exhibition at Tate Britain. We also look for a fit around our brand and our values.”

Gordon’s Gin is equally well-matched with the Turner Prize, according to Amanda Cropper, head of corporate development at the Tate. “Gordon’s considers itself to be a very British brand, so aligning itself with Tate Britain made sense; but it also promotes itself as having a quirky edge. Through the current three-year sponsorship of the Turner Prize, and the media coverage that goes with it, Gordon’s is reaching the kind of cutting-edge, clued-up audience it aims for,” says Cropper. Moreover, lateral thinking - in the shape of touring “railway galleries”, taking the Turner Prize entries to London Victoria, Manchester and Edinburgh stations - has helped extend the art/brand link to a much wider audience.

But different companies may look for different benefits from sponsorship. For some, such as Tate & Lyle, the focus is on corporate social responsibility: hence its support for educational programmes. For others, it may be an opportunity to showcase technological skills in a public context: Amanda Cropper gives the example of BT’s sponsorship “in kind” of Tate Online, which extends beyond funding to design and technical support.

Other sponsors, such as private bankers, lawyers or accountants, may be particularly attracted by the opportunities for top-end client entertainment. For them, great galleries provide an ideal highbrow setting in which to nurture relations with sophisticated, discreet, inaccessible clients, without the noisy backdrop of opera or horseracing.

Rather than involvement with specific projects, some firms opt for an annual subscription based corporate membership, though the major London galleries set their stakes high. Corporate benefactors of the National Gallery, for instance, must find £25,000 (plus VAT) a year, while corporate contributors are charged £10,000. Corporate membership of Tates Modern and Britain costs £35,000; Tate Liverpool, aligning itself with local businesses, offers packages at £1,500 and £3,000. Interestingly, the Met in New York offers a whole spectrum of corporate packages, from as little as $1,500 for small businesses, up to $100,000.

Corporate membership packages fulfil a somewhat different role from sponsorship, says Nina Diefenbach at the Met. “It’s a more philanthropic exercise, more about employee benefits and being seen to be a good corporate citizen, rather than branding and profile,” she comments. The packages of corporate benefits on offer in return (which, incidentally, may come in handy for client entertainment as well as employees) typically include the use or discounted hire of dedicated galleries for entertaining, invitations to private views of exhibitions, free entry to exhibitions, special workshops and discounts in the gallery shops and restaurants.

Tax benefits

Corporate patrons (though not sponsors) may also be lured by the carrot of tax benefits. The US is particularly generous, in that up to 100% of the membership fee is tax deductible. In France, companies supporting a gallery through “philanthropy” (which has a specific status under French tax law) can offset 60% of the value of their gift against taxes, and those who contribute to the acquisition of a “national treasure” can offset 90% of the value.

Clearly, corporate funding has become an important factor in the way museums and galleries operate; indeed, it’s widely acknowledged that many exhibitions would not happen at all without it. But the relationship between business and cultural institutions is changing, according to Amanda Cropper. “It’s less philanthropic than it was five or 10 years ago, with an increasing emphasis on the creation of partnerships and two-way business benefits,” she comments.

It all sounds terribly win-win. But is there a risk that sponsors may start expecting to call the shots in the way an exhibition or project is shaped? Certainly not, says Anneke Riftkin at the British Museum. “We like to involve them in the development of an exhibition, and we welcome ideas, feedback and contacts; but they don’t have direct input into the contents, and nor do they have the right to veto it if they don’t approve,” she says. So you have been warned.

Faith Glasgow is a business and finance writer.