Appendix – Interview Transcriptions
Appendix 1 – Interview with Anna Lundström, April 12, 2025
1. 1. What does “being relevant” mean to you in your role?
I tend to think broadly. It has to be relevant for a wide range of people with different
backgrounds and knowledge levels. Part of our mission is to contribute to public debate,
and we have to keep that in mind in everything we do. Relevance means responding to
current societal issues and involving diverse groups in our work.
2. 2. How do you work to create and promote relevance for people who are not used to
visiting museums?
We focus a lot on language accessibility — using multiple reading levels and simplifying
complex content. We also incorporate animations and multimedia, because not everyone
connects through text. Offering content in multiple languages is also important.
3. 3. Do you have any examples of when SMVK has successfully worked with relevance to
reach a group of people who rarely visit museums?
Yes. 'Stories from Syria' brought in many visitors who were new to museums, thanks to its
personal storytelling. Another example is the 'Ultra' exhibition in Stockholm, which
attracted a wide range of football and politics enthusiasts, including many young and older
men.
4. 4. What challenges do you think the museum faces today in terms of being relevant —
socially, politically, or organizationally?
One major issue is internal representation. If we want to reflect society, we have to start
with who works here. It’s a slow process but necessary for long-term relevance.
5. 5. Who do you think are still “outsiders” to the museum, and what keeps them from
engaging?
Many people don’t even know we exist. Museums can seem exclusive or intellectual, as if
prior knowledge is required to belong. That’s a perception we need to change.
6. 6. When starting a new project, how do you determine what is relevant for your
audience or your colleagues?
Right now we rely on proposals and internal discussions, but I think we should involve the
public earlier — maybe through the website or community feedback.
7. 7. Have you ever had to change direction mid-project due to new insights about the
audience or questions of inclusion?
Yes, in the 'Existens' project we adjusted language and content based on feedback from
students. For example, the term 'Sami' was unfamiliar to some, so we added context and
explanation.
8. 8. What would you like to see change in how the museum defines and works with
relevance in the future?
We need more flexibility — smaller exhibition spaces with faster production cycles.
Relevance is dynamic and requires agile infrastructure.
Appendix 2 – Interview with Britta [Last Name], 2025
9. 1. What does “being relevant” mean to you in your role?
Being attentive to what's happening in society and working with themes that resonate with
people, even in unexpected ways.
10. 2. How do you work to create and promote relevance for people who are not used to
visiting museums?
By improving accessibility in many forms — including emotional and intellectual. We hold
workshops and use diverse formats to connect with various audiences.
11. 3. Do you have any examples of when SMVK has successfully worked with relevance to
reach a group of people who rarely visit museums?
A project with newly arrived youth allowed students to co-create content. It made them feel
involved and attracted family and friends to the museum.
12. 4. What challenges do you think the museum faces today in terms of being relevant —
socially, politically, or organizationally?
Museums are still quite homogeneous. Structural change is needed. Political direction can
also complicate the mission of staying relevant.
13. 5. Who do you think are still “outsiders” to the museum, and what keeps them from
engaging?
People from different cultural or linguistic backgrounds, and young adults without
museum-going habits. Barriers include language and a sense of not belonging.
14. 6. When starting a new project, how do you determine what is relevant for your
audience or your colleagues?
We look at current social dialogues but need to be better at involving audiences early in the
process.
15. 7. Have you ever had to change direction mid-project due to new insights about the
audience or questions of inclusion?
Yes, we had to simplify and clarify some concepts after realizing our target audience didn’t
understand them.
16. 8. What would you like to see change in how the museum defines and works with
relevance in the future?
More agile processes and spaces that allow quick responses to social changes.
17. 9. Do you think relevance always needs to come from within the institution, or can it be
defined by the public?
Relevance shouldn’t only come from within. Listening to communities and allowing them to
shape the content is essential — even if it challenges traditional structures.