Museum name change: What’s the value of ‘Valley’?

Will the Sonoma Valley Museum of Art change its name to Sonoma Museum of Art?

Its board of directors thinks the switch suggests a more relevant, dynamic arts organization; it says the change is one part of a comprehensive strategic marketing plan designed to reach a larger, more diverse audience. Others find the proposed name generic, and feel it undermines the history, loyalty and identity built up during the organization’s 20 year history.

Does the word ‘Valley’ suggest a focus that is too local, too limiting? Or does it offer the advantages of identification with the unique Sonoma Valley?

On April 30, dues-payimng members of the museum will decide. The board has called a special meeting to resolve the issue, with each of the 650 members having one vote, either in person or by proxy. At issue: an amendment of the Articles of Incorporation to change the name of the corporation to “Sonoma Museum of Art.”

Members of the museum have or will receive information packages that include arguments for and against the change. That material is posted below:

Statement from the Board of Directors

We,  the  board  of  the  museum,  respectfully  request  your  support  for  a  change  of  the  museum  name  from  Sonoma  Valley   Museum  of  Art  to  Sonoma  Museum  of  Art  (“SMA”).   Naming  is  a  personal  exercise.  Everyone  brings  a  universe  of  their  own  perceptions  to  the  interpretation  of  a  name,  and  that   explains  the  usual  tension  around  these  issues.  If  a  new  name  helps  the  organization  to  thrive,  then  one’s  commitment  to,   and  belief  in  the  organization  will  also  thrive.     We  believe  the  correct  strategic  decision  is  to  change  the  name  of  the  Sonoma  Valley  Museum  of  Art  to  Sonoma  Museum  of   Art.

The  strategic  plan  for  the  museum  identifies  that  for  the  museum  to  become  financially  sustainable,  it  needs  to  grow.  That   means  it  needs  to  expand  its  audience  beyond  local  awareness  and  attendance.  In  terms  of  branding  -­‐  which  fundamentally   includes  naming  –  are  we  telegraphing  an  experience  that  this  larger,  more  diverse  audience  wants?    Is  the  name  perceived   by  this  more  disparate  and  diffuse  audience  to  mean  “a  relevant,  dynamic  arts  organization”?   “Sonoma  Valley”  suggests  a  local  focus.  By  contextual  extension,  it  indicates  an  understanding  of  art  that  is  linked  to  —  and   limited  by  —  the  region.

Perceptually,  “Sonoma  Valley”  is  a  specific  place  with  a  specific  history  and  culture,  but  may  not  be  as   well  known  to  the  larger  audience  of  the  Bay  Area  and  tourists.  However,  to  the  larger  audience  “Sonoma”  means  wine,   tourism,  food,  cheese  and  agriculture.  We  want  it  to  also  include  ART.   “Sonoma”  is  significantly  broader,  and  more  open  as  a  concept.  It  is  an  idea-­‐space  of  more  potential  and  diversity.   Google  Maps  does  not  include  “Sonoma  Valley”  but  only  “Sonoma.”  People  in  the  Bay  -­‐  our  most  immediate   audience/awareness  growth  opportunity  -­‐  know  the  area  predominantly  as  “Sonoma.”  “Sonoma  Valley”  appears  to  appeal  to   a  more  local  demographic.  This  demographic  is  of  great  importance  to  the  organization,  but  it  is  just  one  sector  of  the   audience  -­‐  and  one  that  we  hope  values  the  health  and  potential  of  the  organization  over  connection  to  a  name.

Finally,  there  are  some  mechanics  in  terms  of  what  qualifies  as  a  good  name  (this  from  our  branding  expert,  Jeremy  Mende):

•  Memorability  is  key.  Shorter  is  more  memorable.

•  “Valley”  is  an  unnecessary  modifier.    Take  SF  MOMA.  Would  it  sound  better  as  “San  Francisco  City  Museum  of  Modern   Art”?  The  word  “City”  is  unnecessary,  not  in  common  parlance,  and  suggests  a  local  focus,  as  opposed  to  the  world-­‐class  art   museum  it  is.   If  the  museum’s  true  strategic  aim  is  to  invite  a  broader,  more  diverse  audience,  and  if  it  is  committed  to  demonstrating  its   values  of  innovation,  commitment  to  community,  and  supporting  dynamic  art,  the  name  change  will  help  in  telegraphing   these  commitments.

In  California  alone,  there  have  been  many  successful  name  changes  at  museums: 1. Laguna  Beach  Museum  to  Laguna  Art  Museum   2. Autry  National  Center  for  the  American  West  to  Autry  Museum  (specifically  changed  for  higher  google  results)   3. Santa  Monica  Museum  of  Art  to  ICA  LA   4. Palm  Springs  Desert  Museum  to  Palm  Springs  Art  Museum   5. Oakland  Museum  to  Oakland  Museum  of  California  Art   6. Women’s  History  Reclamation  Project  to  Women’s  Museum  of  California.

Argument against the name change, by Jim Callahan

• What’s in a name?

In this particular case, a great deal. The Sonoma Valley Museum of Art came into being 20 years ago this fall. The organizing committee gave very vigorous attention to choosing a name that conveyed the mission of the organization and that linked its identity with a very special place and a unique community. Several of us were fortunate to be on that committee, and we believed that there was a significant portion of the population that desired an opportunity to participate in high-quality, innovative, and interesting art programming. We were proved right as the membership grew in five years to (make the museum) be the largest visual arts membership organization in the North Bay region. The support was deep enough and strong enough to enable the museum to purchase a building and design and build a world class facility.

• The name is not a limiting factor

SVMA has hosted exhibits by Auguste Rodin, Francisco Goya, Mark di Suvero, Ansel Adams, Sandow Burke, Pablo Picasso, Richard Diebenkorn, David Hockney, William Wiley and many other artists of national and international renown. Past exhibits have attracted the attention of the New York Times, Sunset magazine and VIA, the AAA magazine. Clearly, the name was not a limiting factor.

• The name is an asset

Because of its reputation for wine, food, and the finer things in life, Sonoma Valley has a worldwide and very positive reputation. Sonoma Valley as a modifier is a very valuable asset of the museum. Why would the museum want to discontinue the advantages of identification with Sonoma Valley?

• The name is a distinguishing factor

The name also differentiates the museum from the other museums in the area. There is a common confusion around Sonoma as a name; County, City, or Valley? Choosing “Valley” as an identifier helps distinguish this museum. Removing “Valley” exacerbates the confusion.

• Why change the name?

SVMA has thrived here for 20 years. There must be a compelling reason to change the identity now. We have yet to hear one. At one time the museum had over 1000 members, today there are around 650. That is a problem. But that problem will not be solved by changing the name.

The new mission statement calling for “Building Community Around Art” is a worthwhile objective, but rejecting 20 years of goodwill and identity does not help build community. Internet presence and a functional website are essential to any enterprise today, but search engine optimization depends on website content, not its name. Taking “Valley” out of the name will not improve search rankings.

If a new logo will help illustrate a new emphasis in the mission, then change the logo, not the name.

• SVMA is a membership organization

We all would like to see the Sonoma Valley Museum of Art thrive. We support the intention to expand the reach and influence of this important civic institution. We would like to see these things done using the name and identity which already has a significant reputation. Those actions are within the purview of the Board of Directors. Changing the identity requires the approval of the membership because it is fundamentally OUR museum. Safeguard its identity by voting NO.

More public opinion