Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Commemoration or commodification? A stakeholder’s discourse around the establishment of the martyrdom museum



Objective: The purpose of the article was to explore a mode of stakeholders’ discussion arrangement with the support of social media platforms, about the project of a new dark- heritage oriented museum.

Research Design & Methods: The study was realized within the qualitative approach and case study method. The project of the new museum in Krakow was selected purposively for analysis.

Findings: The results revealed differences in stakeholders’ demands, barriers in participative projects as well as how conflicting values are managed. Moreover, the usage of social media may sway the stakeholder’s attributes, as well as enhance participation of the other.

Contribution & Value Added: The study contributes by analyzing a multi-stakeholder dialogue focused on the wider museum environment. The practice of participation is hard for effective realization, even if stakeholder expectations are similar.


Communication, dark tourism, museum, social media, stakeholders


Author Biography

Magdalena Sawczuk

PhD Student at Jagiellonian University in Krakow. In 2016 awarded a master degree in Tourism Management at Jagiellonian University in Krakow. Research interests refers to the audience development strategies of museums as well as to the area of managing change in museums, relationship management and transformation of the museum’s role in the environment.


  1. Alexander, M., & Hamilton, K. (2016). Recapturing place identification through community herit-age marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 50(7-8), 1118-1136.
  2. Bettinazzi, E.L., & Zollo, M. (2017). Stakeholder orientation and acquisition performance. Strategic Management Journal,38(12), 2465-2485.
  3. Biran, A., Poria, Y., & Oren, G. (2011). Sought experiences at (dark) heritage sites. Annals of tour-ism research, 38(3), 820-841.
  4. Bowman, M.S., & Pezzullo, P.C. (2009). What’s so ‘Dark’ about ‘Dark Tourism’?: Death, Tours, and Performance. Tourist Studies, 9(3), 187-202.
  5. Busby, G., & Devereux, H. (2015). Dark tourism in context: The Diary of Anne Frank. European Journal of Tourism, Hospitality and Recreation, 6(1), 27-38.
  6. Christensen, H.S. (2011). Political activities on the Internet: Slacktivism or political participation by other means? First Monday, 16(2).
  7. Clarke, D., Cento Bull, A., & Deganutti, M. (2017). Soft power and dark heritage: multiple potential-ities. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 23(6), 660-674.
  8. Crooke, E. (2010). The politics of community heritage: motivations, authority, and control. Interna-tional Journal of Heritage Studies, 16(1-2), 16-29.
  9. Elsorady, D.E. (2018). The role of stakeholders as a competitive advantage in the formulation of antiquity museum strategies in Egypt. Museum Management and Curatorship, 33(4), 365-381.
  10. Freeman, R.E. (1984). Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman.
  11. Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 191 205.
  12. Garrod, B., Fyall, A., Leask, A., & Reid, E. (2012). Engaging residents as stakeholders of the visitor attraction. Tourism Management, 33(5), 1159-1173.
  13. Gilmore, A., & Rentschler, R. (2002). Changes in museum management: From a custodial empha-sis to a marketing emphasis .Journal of Management Development, 21(10), 745-760. doi: 10.1108/02621710210448020.
  14. Halewood, C., & Hannam, K. (2001). Viking Heritage Tourism: Authenticity and Commodification. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(3), 565-580.
  15. Hankinson, G. (2009). Managing destination brands: establishing a theoretical foundation. Journal of Marketing Management, 25(1-2), 97-115.
  16. Heidelberg, B.A.W (2015). Managing ghosts: exploring local government involvement in dark tourism. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 10(1), 74-90. DOI: 10.1080/1743873X.2014.953538.
  17. Hensel, P., & Glinka, B. (2018). Grounded Theory. In M. Ciesielska & D. Jemielniak (Eds.), Qualita-tive Methodologies in Organization Studies. Volume I: Theories and New Approaches(pp.27-47), Pallgrave Macmillan.
  18. Holdgaard, N., & Klastrup, L. (2014). Between the control and creativity: challenging co-creation and social media use in a museum context. Digital Creativity, 25(3), 190-202.
  19. Jagodzińska, K. (2019). Miejsce pamięci kontra miejsce do życia? Received from:,2576.html, 26.03.2020.
  20. Kennedy, M.R. (2017). Shapeholders: Business Success in the Age of Activism. Columbia University Press.
  21. Kidd, J, & Cardiff, R. (2017). ‘A space of negotiation’: Visitor generated content and ethics at Tate. Museum & Society, 15(1), 43-55.
  22. Kim, S. (2018). Virtual exhibitions and communication factors. Museum Management and Curator-ship, 33(3), 243-260.
  23. Krakow. City Center of Dialogue (2019). Received from:, 26.03.2020.
  24. Krisjanous, J. (2016). An exploratory multimodal discourse analysis of dark tourism websites: Communicating issues around contested sites. Journal of Destination Marketing & Manage-ment, 5(4), 341-350.
  25. Kristofferson, K., White, K., & Peloza, J. (2014). The nature of slacktivism: How the social observa-bility of an initial act of token supports affects subsequent prosocial action. Journal of Con-sumer Research, 40(6), 1149-1166.
  26. Legget, J. (2009). Measuring what we treasure or treasuring what we measure? Investigating where community stakeholders locate the value in their museums. Museum Management and Curatorship, 24(3), 213-232.
  27. Magee, R., & Gilmore, A. (2015). Heritage site management: from dark tourism to transformative service experience?. Service Industries Journal, 35(15), 1-20.
  28. Mangwane, J., Hermann, U.P., & Lenhard, A.I. (2019). Who visits the apartheid museum and why? An exploratory study of the motivations to visit a dark tourism site in South Africa. Interna-tional Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 13(3), 273-287.
  29. McLean, F. (1997). Marketing the Museum. London: Routledge.
  30. Meijer van Mensch, L. (2011). New Challenges, new priorities: analyzing ethical dilemmas from a stakeholder’s perspective in the Netherlands. Museum Management and Curatorship, 26(2), 113-128. DOI: 10.1080/09647775.2011.566712.
  31. Mitchell, R.K., Agle, B.R., & Wood, D.J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Re-view, 22(4), 853-886.
  32. Museum of Krakow (2020). Webiste of the Museum of Kraków. Retrieved from on 26.03.2020.
  33. Najda-Janoszka, M., & Sawczuk, M. (2018). Museum as a Research Object in the Strategic Man-agement Field. In. A. Nalepka & A. Ujwary-Gil (Eds.), Business and Non-profit Organizations Facing Increased Competitions and Growing Customers’ Demands(pp. 51-67). Nowy Sącz: Wyższa Szkoła Biznesu - National Louis University.
  34. Osiyevskyy, O., & Biloshapka, V. (2017). Shapeholders: managing them as allies, partners and significant constituents.Strategy & Leadership, 45(5), 41-48.
  35. Rasche, A., &Esser, D.E. (2006). From stakeholder management to stakeholder accountability. Applying habermasian discourse ethics to accountability research. Journal of Business Ethics, 65, 251-267.
  36. Roloff, J. (2008). Learning from Multi-Stakeholder Networks: Issue-Focussed Stakeholder Man-agement. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 233-250.
  37. Saito, H., & Ruhanen, L. (2017). Power in tourism stakeholder collaborations: Power types and power holders. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 31, 189-196. 10.1016/j.jhtm.2017.01.001.
  38. Schmeltz, L., & Kjeldsen, A. K. (2019). Co-creating polyphony or cacophony? A case study of a pub-lic organization’s brand co-creation process and the challenge of orchestrating multiple inter-nal voices. Journal of Brand Management, 26(3), 304-316. DOI: 10.1057/s41262-018-0124-2.
  39. Serravalle, F., Ferraris, A., Vrontis, D., Thrassou, A., & Christofi, M. (2019). Augmented reality in the tourism industry: A multi-stakeholder analysis of museums. Tourism Management Per-spectives, 32.
  40. Shymko, Y., & Roulet, T.J. (2017). When does Medici hurt da Vinci? Mitigating the signaling effect of extraneous stakeholder relationships in the field of cultural production. Academy of Man-agement Journal, 60(4), 1307-1338.
  41. Simone-Charteris, M.T., Kirkpatrick, J., & McLaughlin, C. (2018). An Investigation of the Differences that Exist between Generations in Relation to Supporting Dark Tourism in Northern Ireland. DBS Business Review, 2, 69-88.
  42. Stone, P.R. (2006). A dark tourism spectrum: Towards a typology of death and macabre related tourist sites, attractions and exhibitions. Tourism, 54(2), 145-160.
  43. Stylianou-Lambert, T., Boukas, N. & Christodoulou- Yerali, M. (2014). Museums and cultural sus-tainability: stakeholders, forces, and cultural policies. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 20, (5), 566-587.
  44. Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of management review, 20(3), 571-610.
  45. Suligoj, M. (2019). Dark events of the Istrian countryside: an electronic media perspective. Aca-demia Turistica- Tourism and Innovation Journal, 12(2), 121-132. DOI: 10.26493/2335-4194.12.121-132.
  46. Surugiu, M. R., & Surugiu, C. (2015). Heritage tourism entrepreneurship and social media: oppor-tunities and challenges. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences,188,74-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.03.340.
  47. Tucker, H., Shelton, E.J., & Bae, H. (2017). Post-disaster tourism: Towards a tourism of transition. Tourist Studies, 17(3), 306-327.
  48. Walter, T. (2009). Dark tourism: mediating between the dead and the living. In: R. Sharpley & P.R. Stone (Eds.), The Darker Side of Travel: The Theory and Practice of Dark Tourism. Aspects of Tourism(pp.39-55).Channel View Publications and Multilingual Matters, Bristol, U. K.


Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1-10 of 89

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.