The skills and knowledge of the owners and employees of cultural enterprises on economic use of financial resources do not guarantee valuable artistic results. Therefore, a substantiated question has arisen: how to evaluate management in enterprises with bad financial ratios and outstanding artistic indicators. The existing definitions of cultural management (Aageson, 2008; Hagoort, 2007; Klamer, 1999; Stam, 2006; Nordman, 2003) also do not provide precise suggestions for determining the most important indicators in the evaluation of cultural management. The question is how to evaluate management in cultural entrepreneurship by determining the most important indicators for a cultural enterprise’s performance improvement. In order to define the goal of the stakeholders’ (artists, clients, media, arts scholars, third parties providing funds, cooperation partners) engagement, it is necessary to analyse the area of an enterprise’s activities, and in what way and by what kind of activities it is possible to engage the stakeholders. During the course of empirical research, it is planned to disclose, analyse and interpret the subjective reasons of pursuit. Although a numerical evaluation of stakeholders was obtained during the research and data analysis performed by Spearman’s rho correlation calculations, the obtained results during the interpretation have not been generalised. The research results reveal the role of the cultural enterprise’s stakeholders’ engagement in the evaluation of management, point to the importance of the goals’ analysis as well as the analysis of each stakeholder’s engagement, and define the criteria for evaluating the activities in cultural entrepreneurship.
Washington DC USAID Center for Development Information and Development Evaluation. [Accessed 20.02.2016]. Available from http://transition.usaid.gov/policy/evalweb/documents/TIPSConductingMixedMethodEvaluations.pdf
Walliman N. (2006). Social research methods. London: Thousand Oaks p. 224.
Waddock S. Bodwell C. (2002). From TQM to TRM: emerging responsibility management approaches.Journal of Corporate Citizenship 7: 113-126.
Zemīte I. Janovs V. Luka I. (2011). Quality benchmarking methodology: Case study of finance and culture industries in Latvia. Acta univ.agric.et silvic.2: 385-390