The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjam20

Sewing Connections between Artists’ Legacy and

Fashion… A Matter of Tailor-Made Economics and
Marketing

Angela Besana & Annamaria Esposito

To cite this article: Angela Besana & Annamaria Esposito (2022): Sewing Connections between
Artists’ Legacy and Fashion… A Matter of Tailor-Made Economics and Marketing, The Journal of
Arts Management, Law, and Society, DOI: 10.1080/10632921.2022.2102558

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10632921.2022.2102558

Published online: 27 Jul 2022.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 23

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjam20
The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society
https://doi.org/10.1080/10632921.2022.2102558

Sewing Connections between Artists’ Legacy and

Fashion… A Matter of Tailor-Made Economics and
Marketing
Angela Besana and Annamaria Esposito
IULM University, Milan, Italy

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Artists, fashion and foundations can connect in different ways. Artist-endowed
Operating and independent foundations tell biographies and legacies foundation; fashion;
of artists. During their life and as for their legacy, artists can influence economics; marketing;
styles, frames, fashion being one constitutive way of life. Fashion US
corporations and foundations can be inspired by artists and artists
can be supported by them. The aim of this article is to estimate how
much accounting data of American artist-endowed foundations give
evidence of their connections through art-keting with multiple stake-
holders in order to support creativity, above all, fashion. Art-keting
includes several and complex phenomena, from co-marketing to
contaminations and hybridizations. It encompasses both relationship
marketing and social media communication. The methodology
includes the analysis of economic performance as for data in 990
Forms and a multiple regression analysis of 2016’s accounting main
lines of a sample of the biggest US artists-endowed foundations. If
artist-endowed foundations connect with fashion thanks to multiple
projects, their assets grow thanks to art-keting.

From artists to fashion: Economics of creative connections, partnerships

and asset growth
Artists, fashion and foundations can connect in different ways. Operating and inde-
pendent foundations tell biographies and legacies of artists. During their life and as
for their legacy, artists can influence styles, frames and colors of the way of life, fashion
being one way of life. Fashion/Art foundations can be inspired by artists and artists
can be supported by fashion corporations and foundations. Grant-making foundations
can support both artists’ and fashion foundations.
The multiplicity of connections and intersections is very impressive, and their com-
plexity is constantly growing. Artists’ house museums can guest fashion events as well
as fashion corporations and foundations can manage own museums, departments and
offices where artists can show and implement their latest artworks and performances
(Petrov 2019). Museums can display both artists’ and stylists’ legacies and connections

CONTACT Angela Besana angela.besana@iulm.it IULM University, Business, Law, Economics and Consumer
Behaviour “Carlo A. Ricciardi”, Via P. Filargo 38 - 20143 Milano.
© 2022 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 A. BESANA AND A. ESPOSITO

between fashion and arts, their histories, their collaborations and their mutual and
reciprocal growth (Wallenberg 2020).
It’s a matter of tailor-made relations with specific goals and impacts on both indus-
tries and markets, where creativity and fashion can grow thanks co-marketing at a
first step of collaboration—and co-project management with partnerships, at a mature
step of collaboration. Artists do not only suggest colors and plots for co-marketing,
but they can also suggest fabrics, motifs and icons for fashion production, in a sus-
tainable way too. Fashion brands can not only support artists’ promotion, but they
can nurture artists’ careers with alive programs at fashion labs and foundations. Every
connection is sewed according to needs and goals of both and the artist’s and the
fashion supplier’s goals can include sustainability.
Sustainability is here recorded as the most contemporary goal and commitment to
be coped with thanks the most multifaceted partnerships and growth of performances,
economic ones included (Caust 2022; García-Ceballos et  al. 2021; Nemethy 2021;
Poling, 2021; Fabbricatti, Boissenin, and Citoni 2020; Leus and Verhelst 2018; Shih
2018). With implications for different industries, sustainability means partnerships on
a long-term basis with drastic innovation and impact on businesses and performances
of partners (universities and their education programs, for example), on quarters and
design of a town (with new architectures, buildings and social programs around or
inside of these architectures and buildings). Next to arts and fashion, social enterprises
can be activated and supported by both artist-endowed foundations and fashion cor-
porations (Lam 2020; McQuilten 2017). Hybridization of museums, partnerships and
social enterprises can be implemented, when these partners commit to the same merit
cause and inspirations: the matching of creative and fashion contents with the artist’s
legacy and the welfare of communities for projects as concerns fashion and arts with
zero impact on environment, multicultural dialogue on fabrics, styles and traditions
of different ethnicities of communities, art and fashion for therapies for the recovery
of citizens with disabilities.
If artists commit themselves and their legacy to support and supplement public and
private resources for growth of creativity and social projects in local communities and
clusters, artist-endowed foundations can be the medium and the asset of their commit-
ments and, as much as they grow with their assets, these foundations can get engaged in
arts stewardship, cultural philanthropy and social capital (Lam 2020; Besana and Esposito
2021; Bagwell, Corry, and Rotheroe 2015; Rushton 2014; Caves 2002; Luhmann, 2000).
It is not only a matter of marketing and co-marketing. Artists and their foundations
with their research departments, they can inspire stylists and designers with their
experiments on colors, materials, polymers. Artist-endowed foundations are locations
for fashion events. At the same time, fashion foundations and corporations support
artists’ exhibitions and events in their galleries and showrooms. Several examples can
be given for the matching gifts and supplies artists and fashion can grant to each other.
Artists can become sponsors, ambassadors, patrons… friends of multiple creative
and merit causes. In the American landscape they can give birth not only to
artist-endowed foundations but also to ancillary organizations like trusts, family foun-
dations, societies and associations, whose aims and assets can count the above-mentioned
connections with fashion.
 The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society 3

US independent foundations are grant-making and operating organizations, whose

aim is to engage citizens and communities, develop and improve their quality of life
according to the vision of the founder, maximize opportunities of culture and creativity
within communities (Besana and Esposito 2021; Jaskyte 2019; Berman, Major, and
Franklin 2017). The founder can be an individual, a family, a patron whose legacy is
matched with needs of a community, district and cluster.
When the founder is an artist, the artist’s philanthropy and legacy can target fashion
and creativity where the illustration and the signaling power of icons, logos and brands
can match. This philanthropy, this legacy and this relationship, they are a very recent
issue in the economics of American foundations and not-for-profit organizations
(Vincent 2018) and they have never been investigated for both marketing and the
evolution to more intense collaborations with fashion, research and development,
influence on styles in the fashion industry. Founders are connected not only with the
traditional fine arts but also with creativity and creative projects. Photographers, illus-
tration artists (cartoonists, as well), designers, architects, and conceptual and perfor-
mance artists are increasing their willingness-to-donate and their legacy through
foundations, next to their being involved in creative industries.
Though a small portion of all US foundations, these endowments are growing in
number and grant-making, and they represent a potential force shaping creative indus-
tries and education about creativity thanks to the magnitude of their assets.
The growth of their assets is granted by the multiple stakeholders’ engagement in
partnerships.
These foundations own assets of different kinds, from investments to heritages, from
houses to fabrics and polymers of contemporary arts. These foundations can play
different roles thanks to their assets and with the goal of assets maximization: research,
patents, applied arts, grant-making, branding, delivering support to charitable organi-
zations and individuals, from artists to scholars, from citizens to clusters, from quarters
to the whole community and crossing boundaries of communities and internationally.
These comprehensive foundations have mixed and developed multiple strategies, such
as grant-making in combination with operating an artist residency program, exhibition
and art education program, study center and house museum, so that they can match
their purposes with creative industries such as fashion and sustainability of fashion
and they can stimulate new entrepreneurship thanks to social enterprise projects
(Thorisdottir and Johannsdottir 2019; McQuilten 2017).
Their assets depend on their investment strategies as well as on their reputation
for connections with multiple goals and projects at local, national and international
levels. When assets increase, their connections grow with different industries like
fashion and within communities as well as on the international scenario.
These foundations commit themselves to both fundraising and grant-making. They
collect funds (contributions, donations, sponsorships and grants) so that they can
enable their multiple activities and grant-making for social enterprises, projects and
connections they can afford, and they want to collaborate with. The complexity of
their collaborations can be summarized in art-keting for progressive steps of engage-
ment with cultural and creative entrepreneurs according to the latest literature about
art organizations as complex systems, which needs engagement of multiple stakeholders
4 A. BESANA AND A. ESPOSITO

and resources (Cleopatra, Sloan, and Butler 2021; Rentschler and Reid 2021; Strom,
Olsen, and Foss 2020; Jung and Vakharia 2019; Passebois-Ducros, Trinquecoste, and
Pichon 2015)
The aim of this article is to estimate how much accounting data of American
artist-endowed foundations give evidence of their connections through art-keting with
multiple stakeholders in order to support creativity, above all, fashion. This is thanks
to their engagement with multiple stakeholders in complex systems. Collaborations
with fashion will be given evidence for their meaningful connections with projects at
local and international levels thanks to the versatile meaning of art-keting: from
co-marketing of events and products to the development of new products according
to partnerships which are the most mature step of engagement.
The methodology includes the analysis of economic performance as for data in 990
Forms and a multiple regression analysis of 2016s accounting main lines of a sample
of the biggest US artists-endowed foundations. Thanks to this analysis, the economic
performances both on the revenue side (from contributions as result of fundraising,
from programs service revenues and investment income as result of their asset man-
agement) and on the grant-making side (paid grants) of the sample, they will be
connected to the magnitude of their assets as result of increasing partnerships with
multiple goals. If artist-endowed foundations connect with fashion thanks to multiple
projects, accounting data can give evidence of successful connections with the growth
of their assets.

Art-keting: When art and fashion come together

The term art-keting is a neologism that describes the collaboration between marketing
and the art world (Passebois-Ducros, Trinquecoste, and Pichon 2015) and, for reasons
of structural proximity (Kapferer 2015; Kapferer and Bastien 2012; Steele 2012) art-keting
is mainly exploit by luxury fashion brands.
Art-keting deals with the various approaches by which fashion brands incorporate
art within their activities, and it is not a simply marketing strategy. On the one hand,
it goes beyond a disruptive idea, being a pivot strategy for many brands to add to
their products and activities emotional and stimulating effects coming from the artistic
world. On the other, these partnerships allow artists to create and exhibit their work
on a great scale and to make art accessible for all, enabling artists and fashion orga-
nizations to generate new experiences and connect with their different stakeholders
in a deeper way.
The collaboration between art and fashion has its roots in the past. In fact, one of
the first documented cooperation between fashion and art occurred during the twenties
of the last century, when the Italian fashion designer Elsa Schiaparelli worked together
with the artists Salvador Dalí and Jean Cocteau, in order to create new ideas for her
clothing designs (Kastner 2013).
The collaboration has evolved thanks to relationship marketing for decades. In this
context, relationship marketing has encompassed a diverse range of topics: co-marketing,
new ideas and contents on both sides, image and reputation management, attraction
of audiences, consumers, sponsor, donors and the measurement of levels of satisfaction
beneficiaries and users. For foundations, the acquisition of funds is one of the main
 The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society 5

objectives of relationship marketing, as well as all forms of activities aimed at stimu-

lating public interest and support and retaining and satisfying existing stakeholders
and donors.
Effective relationships depend on effective communication and for this reason foun-
dations need to develop communication strategies consistent with their mission and
core activities. Indeed, communication priorities must be clearly identified and aimed
toward spreading and increasing knowledge of the same foundations among key stake-
holders to engage them.
Over time, relationship marketing has reinforced its power. Alongside traditional
institutional communications with traditional media, most convey both corporate and
project communications through their website and online communication, such as
social media accounts.
Over time, it emerged an ongoing process of artification (Shapiro 2019; Shapiro and
Heinich 2012; Massi and Turrini 2020), that is, the transformation of non-art into art,
especially and strategically employed by fashion in recent times (Kapferer 2015; Massi
and Turrini 2020; Masè 2020).1
From the art-keting standpoint, artists and fashion can collaborate in different ways
and with different intensity. Massi and Turrini (2020) highlighted three main ways for
art and fashion organizations to cooperate together: synergies, contaminations and
hybridization.
Referring to art and fashion, synergies are intended as mutually advantageous con-
junctions aimed at achieving together specific purposes without altering the nature of
the involved organizations; contaminations can origin mutual effects and happen when
art and fashion organizations cooperate so as to transfuse the values of one into the
products of the other and vice versa (Dion and Arnould 2011). Finally, hybridizations
are collaborations which imply a high level of interaction between art and fashion
institutions and an overlapping between fashion items and works of art.
Table 1 is a summary of increasing levels of integration, assets of multiple stake-
holders and businesses, which are involved in art-keting.
Table 1 shows the growth from the south-west corner to the north-east corner of
the complexity of relations, multi-stakeholders’ and multi-businesses engagements
and, as a consequence, the growth of assets, for the aim of the article, with focus
on artist-endowed foundations, who activate bilateral connections on the fundraising
side and on the grant-making one. Synergies represent the smallest engagement and
commitment with co-marketing, art patronage and sporadic sponsorship. Arts and
fashion are here meant as focused on their core business and the matching of them,

Table 1. Growth of relations, stakeholders, businesses and assets thanks to art-keting.

Modest assets TO→ High assets
Multiple stakeholders’ →Hybridizations Both fundraising and
engagement grant-making for
different businesses
TO ↑ Contaminations→↑ TO ↑
From Modest Synergies→↑ From Core business
engagement
From co-marketing TO→ Partnerships and
and patronage new products
Source: Own elaboration
6 A. BESANA AND A. ESPOSITO

it represents an opportunity for co-marketing. Implications for distinct and separate

audiences, targets and customers can result in the growth of revenues and assets,
but for a modest growth. Contaminations mean a much more engaging intersection,
with the implementation of events and exhibitions and the implication of growing
intensity of collaboration, economic performances and pervasive and matching busi-
nesses. As the most integrating relation, hybridizations result in partnerships with
the commitment on the fundraising side and on the grant-making one for innovation
in the supply-chain and for new products with impact in the market and in the
community, with multi-stakeholders and multi-businesses being the goals for arts
and fashion.
Art-keting encompasses the following forms of collaboration, mentioned above and
relevant to this article, which are sponsorship and arts patronage (synergies); art
foundations and exhibitions (contaminations); art products (hybridizations).
As for sponsorships involving fashion and art world, they frequently assume the
features of partnerships, which imply shared values and vision as well as high level
of engagement with the artist or art institution. In these cases, partnerships are aimed
at defining common project (co-project management) and achieving shared objectives,
going beyond the traditional concept of sponsorship simply connected to marketing
or fundraising (Massi and Turrini 2020).
Art patronage is frequently related to programs of corporate social responsibility,
and, when fashion meets arts, it is linked with actions, such as awards—directly sup-
porting artists or of promoting beauty and creativity; artistic mentoring for emerging
and young artists; agreements for designing fashion products; editorial projects, which,
among others, might include catalogs of sponsored exhibitions.
Considering art foundations, they are nonprofit organizations established by fashion
companies, playing a crucial role in the artification process (Massi and Turrini 2020).
Art foundations are tools for creating legacy—they own private art collections, devel-
oping and supporting long-term cultural and artistic projects, as well as for building
relationships between fashion, arts, communities and territories. In fact, art foundations
organize special contemporary art exhibitions which involve the commission of ad hoc
artistic work, and the selection of special venues. That allows art foundations to team
up with different institutions and stakeholders, and to enhance different places, such
as cities, hotels, museums, bringing—according to Grassi, Swindells, and Wigley
(2019)—many positive benefits, i.e., investments for cities, new jobs, new attraction
for tourists, and reevaluating areas or buildings.
Furthermore, art foundations are active in designing artistic and cultural programs
for children and families aimed to exploit creativity and artistic sensitivity in local
communities.
Art products are the results of a full overlapping process between art and fashion, as
contemporary artists explicitly team up with fashion designers in producing collections
and or capsule (Jelinek 2018). From an art-keting point of view this is the high level
of artification combined with the high intensity of collaboration (Massi and Turrini 2020).
Art-keting does not exclude social media. Social media communication supports
art-keting, as it allows to disseminate posted contents, generating online and offline
engagement, building a two-way-relationship with social media users (Kietzmann
et  al. 2011).
 The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society 7

Furthermore, it contributes at producing synergies between different tools, thanks

to the simultaneous release of the same message on multiple channels such Facebook,
Twitter, and Instagram (Saxton and Wang 2014). Social media communication allows
personalization, both on the operating side and the grant-making side of both art and
fashion, and participation via social media (Holdgaard and Klastrup 2014; Budge and
Burness 2018). Marketing and social media efforts are also crucial from a fundraising
point of view. Their potential is high. Indeed, thanks to the widespread propensity
for online purchases, and online payment methods, people can perceive social media
as the easiest and most comfortable to donate. Furthermore, on the other side, art
and fashion can exploit social media to generate involvement, as it is a suitable tool
for sharing the commitment of sponsors, donors, volunteers and members, and acti-
vating identification mechanisms that can influence other people to contribute to
creative and social causes.

Method and results: Magnitude of assets for connection-sewing

The sample includes 60 US biggest artist-endowed foundations according to 2016s data
for charitable purpose disbursements (from the highest to $200.000), as they were
classified and ranked in www.guidestar.org, www.charitynavigator.org and in the 2018s
Study Report Supplement of Aspen Institute.
The sample was investigated for updated and available 2016s 990 Forms at Guidestar
Database and Charity Navigator and for specific accounting lines. Forms of this sample
were investigated for the following accounting lines of fiscal year 2016: Contributions
and Grants received, Program Service Revenue, Investment Income, Total Revenues,
Contributions, gifts and grants paid, Total Expenses, Gain or Loss, Total Assets, Net
Assets and Investments. For the investigated sample, total assets are more than $2,035
million, revenues more than 184 million, and costs more than 117 million. If the
artist-endowed foundation field’s assets more than doubled in the five-year period of
2011 through 2015, rising 120 percent to $7.66 billion from $3.48 billion (Vincent
2018), this sample, which is updated to 2016s data, represents 26.56 percent of the
universe and the biggest foundations are here investigated.
Investments are one main asset (more than $60 million for the whole sample)
of the biggest foundations like Jerome, the Atlantic, Joan Mitchell, De Kooning,
Block Herb, Cornell Memorial, Helen Frankenthaler, Judd, etc. and they include
state government obligations, corporate stocks and bonds, mortgage loans and a
wide range of performances like interests, receivable or accrued investment incomes.
As for the investment income, the following foundations show the highest income
of the sample: Judd, Joan Mitchell, Roy Lichtenstein, Jerome, Cornell, Atlantic, De
Kooning, Kelley, Frankenthaler, Block Herb and Keith Haring with more than
$700,000 in 2016.
Contributions are results of their fundraising and, for this sample, they are more
than 61.9 million. As result of their grant-making, paid grants are more than 61.3
million. As they collect, they deliver the same amounts to art projects and social causes.
Besides, most of these foundations can value their artworks for sale and rentals,
which can be another income of their endowments. Therefore, resources of these
foundations derive of investment income, sales of assets, contributions and grants they
8 A. BESANA AND A. ESPOSITO

receive, too. Next to these revenues, program service revenues include a wide range
of sources: for sure, they are accounted when the foundation is operating (next to
grant-making) with ticketing of shows, exhibition income, exhibition rental income,
arts education, royalties, artist edition books, sales of catalogues, reproduction rights,
permissions and licenses, entry fees for house museums, tours, e. Among royalties and
permissions, there is the income for connections with creative industries and fashion,
when fashion and design famous brands implement their motifs, colors, polymers, …
and icons of different inspirations, from Haring to Hockney. For this sample, program
service revenues are more than 38 million.
Total assets were investigated for their Pearson correlations and multiple regression
with SPSS Statistics in the Tables 2–5. Multiple regression was stepwise in order to
select and appreciate which model was better fitting all variables.
Regression analysis was recently implemented by Shih (2018) in order to investigate
innovation and entrepreneurial orientation in cultural and creative industries; by
Campbell, O’Brien, and Taylor (2019) in order to investigate how much performances
of cultural and creative industries are connected with IT and employability; by Muñoz,
Dueñas et. al. (2020) in order to estimate how much survival of these firms depends
on profitability, solvency and indebtedness; by Yum (2020), Qian and Liu (2018) in
order to estimate the growth, urban impact and regional differences in the US creative
economy.
According to Pearson correlations, Table 2 shows that Total assets grow with Net
assets, Investments, Gain or Loss, Investment Income, Program Service revenue,
Contributions and Grants, Grants and similar paid. The fundraising expense is very
modestly correlated to Total Assets. When we chose for the regression Model 1, we
knew all variables were included. The very modest changes in Statistics (Table 3 for
F Change, df1 and Sig. F Change) allowed us to retain the first model as significant
as for R, R square and R square adjusted, all of them identical for three models.
The Table 4 shows significant analysis of variance (ANoVA) for the multiple regres-
sion model of total assets as dependent variable and contributions, program service
revenues, investment income, grants paid, fundraising expense, investment, net assets
and gains (or losses) as independent variables. The parameter estimates in Table 5
shows coefficients in the linear model and t-test, confidence intervals, correlations and
collinearity statistics as they are standards for a multiple regression, which is giving
evidence how much assets increase with contributions, program service revenue, income
service, grants paid and net assets. According to standardized coefficients, net assets
show the highest coefficient of the whole sample, and all parameters are positively
correlated with total assets apart from very modest and negative coefficients for the
fundraising expense, the investment and the gain or loss. On the fundraising side,
when these foundations collect grants and, on the grant-making side, when they deliver
grants to different projects, they can be meant as a the main nodes of collaboration,
which include philanthropy both collected and given for creative projects (Figure 1).
According to different meanings shown in paragraph 2, as long as these foundations
collect grants and resources, they can connect with foundations and corporations and
deliver grants for combined projects and co-marketing, both industries, arts and fashion
for the aim of this article, being strengthened in their growth and evolution of contents
and styles.
Table 2.  Pearson correlations for all variables.
Program Grants and
Total Contributions service Investment similar Net Fundraising Gain
  assets and grants revenue income amounts paid assets expense Investment or loss
Pearson correlations Total Assets 1,000 0,293 0,356 0,367 0,228 1,000 0,017 0,473 0,377
Contributions and grants 0,293 1,000 −0,060 0,227 −0,074 0,293 0,081 −0,109 0,613
Program Service Revenue 0,356 −0,060 1,000 0,310 0,155 0,350 0,059 0,349 0,219
Investment Income 0,367 0,227 0,310 1,000 0,039 0,362 0,425 0,406 0,593
Grants and similar amounts paid 0,228 −0,074 0,155 0,039 1,000 0,218 −0,106 0,613 −0,192
Net assets 1,000 0,293 0,350 0,362 0,218 1,000 0,019 0,468 0,381
Fundraising Expense 0,017 0,081 0,059 0,425 −0,106 0,019 1,000 0,040 0,259
Investments 0,473 −0,109 0,349 0,406 0,613 0,468 0,040 1,000 0,050
Gain or Loss 0,377 0,613 0,219 0,593 −0,192 0,381 0,259 0,050 1,000

Table 3. Summary of three models of stepwise multiple regression.

Change statistics
R Adjusted Std. Error of R Square Sig. F
Model R square R Square the Estimate Change F Change df1 df2 Change
1 1,000a 1,000 0,999 1086007,340 1,000 13920,681 8 51 0,000
2 1,000b 1,000 0,999 1084351,116 0,000 0,842 1 51 0,363
3 1,000c 1,000 0,999 1087141,160 0,000 1,273 1 52 0,264
a
Predictors: (Constant), Gain or Loss, Investment, Fundraising Expense, Program Service Revenue, Net Assets, Grants and similar amounts paid, Contributions and grant, Investment
Income
b
Predictors: (Constant), Gain or Loss, Investment, Program Service Revenue, Net Assets, Grants and similar amounts paid, Contributions and grant, Investment Income
c
Predictors: (Constant), Gain or Loss, Program Service Revenue, Net Assets, Grants and similar amounts paid, Contributions and grant, Investment Income
The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society
9
10 A. BESANA AND A. ESPOSITO

Table 4. ANOVA of the Model 1 with all predictors.

Model Sum of squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 131345735298987000,000 8 16418216912373400,000 13920,681 <,001
Residual 60150009111434,500 51 1179411943361,460
Total 131405885308098000,000 59

Table 5. Coefficients of the Model 1.

Unstandardized Standardized 95,0% confidence Collinearity
coefficients coefficients interval for b Correlations statistics
Lower Upper Zero-
Model 1 B Std. Error Beta T Sig. Bound Bound order Partial Part Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) 47252,626 191003,881 0,247 0,806 −336203,665 430708,917
Contributions and 0,138 0,075 0,008 1,827 0,074 −0,014 0,289 0,293 0,248 0,005 0,515 1,942
grants
Program Service 0,146 0,073 0,007 1,994 0,052 −0,001 0,293 0,356 0,269 0,006 0,764 1,309
revenue
Investment 0,208 0,069 0,014 3,018 0,004 0,069 0,346 0,367 0,389 0,009 0,420 2,382
Income
Grants and similar 0,301 0,111 0,011 2,723 0,009 0,079 0,523 0,228 0,356 0,008 0,536 1,864
amounts paid
Net Assets 1,000 0,004 0,996 256,374 0,000 0,992 1,008 1,000 1,000 0,768 0,595 1,680
Fundraising −1,618 1,764 −0,003 −0,917 0,363 −5,158 1,923 0,017 −0,127 −0,003 0,787 1,271
Expense
Investments −0,014 0,012 −0,006 −1,174 0,246 −0,038 0,010 0,473 −0,162 −0,004 0,377 2,656
Gain or Loss −0,136 0,050 −0,014 −2,735 0,009 −0,235 −0,036 0,377 −0,358 −0,008 0,352 2,845
Source: Own elaboration with SPSS Statistics

Figure 1.  Sewing multiple connections for artist-endowed foundations and fashion thanks to
art-keting.
Source: Own elaboration

Artists can find in showrooms (or exhibition halls) of fashion corporations (or
foundations) their opportunity for live performances and exposition (synergies). Fashion
brands can find in artists’ icons, motifs and their added (economic) value for innovative
styles and supply chains (contaminations). At the same time, artist-endowed foundations
 The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society 11

can get to locations in order to launch products of these innovative supply chains, as
temporary showrooms (hybridizations). These partnerships allow artists to create and
exhibit their work on a great scale and to make art accessible for all, enabling artists
and fashion organizations to generate new experiences and connect with their different
stakeholders in a deeper way thanks to art-keting and social media marketing. These
ones are examples of connections, whose potential growth can be shown in Figure 1,
which shows the financial background and potentials of sewed connections.
In the arrows, Assets are improved by Contributions on the left, so that these
foundations can increase their fund-giving and philanthropy on the right with paid
grants (synergies). On the left, grant-makers can be other foundations (from indepen-
dent to community ones) and sponsors like fashion corporations, whose governance
did not only appreciate the co-marketing but also objectives, projects and the mission
of the artist-endowed foundation. On the right, grant-giving is connected with creativity
of performing and visual arts. Design, fashion, R&D and manufacturing projects can
be funded and supported together with internships, stages and/or life-long learning
programs of artists and stylists (contaminations and hybridization).
The same assets are increased thanks to the investment income on the top of Figure
1 as for connections in the financial markets and thanks to program service revenues
on the bottom as for regular exhibitions, performances, events, special openings,
research programs at foundations with multiple audiences and their willingness-to-pay.
Fashion can be found in co-funded projects and their co-marketing on the right. The
complexity and fertility of these connections can be also on the fundraising side, on
the left, when fashion/art corporations can deliver grants for the legacy improvement
of artist-endowed foundations. In a unique event, all stakeholders at the bottom, on
the left and on the right of Figure 1 can be summed up and fertilization of connec-
tions can grow. It is not excluded that financial stakeholders can be invited to the
same events.
Art foundations can be funded by fashion. Nevertheless, the main focus of this
analysis is the inspiration and initiative of the artist-endowed foundation. Artist-endowed
foundations and art foundations can commit themselves, team up with different insti-
tutions and stakeholders and enhance different places, with many positive benefits,
i.e., investments for cities, new jobs, new attractions for tourists, and reevaluating areas
or buildings, where communities can be empowered around the mixed creativity
art-fashion, fashion-art.
According to the definition of art-keting, synergies and contaminations are wide-
spread among artist-endowed foundations and education of different creative industries,
with fashion and design included. Thanks to the programs Education and Teaching,
Awards and Honors, The Hockney Foundation is spreading the Hockney legacy with
lectures in different classes and programs, from graphics to print-making, from visual
arts to photography. Exhibitions are widespread in museums, universities, libraries, so
that works can contaminates different locations for dialogue on this legacy. As a
long-term and committed contamination, the education initiative of de Kooning
Foundation inspires new generations as for critical and visual thinking, considering
their personal evolution. The Roy Lichtenstein foundation has looked for hybridization
and it has inaugurated a new product in the university and life-long learning, as it
has begun funding its 4-year pilot project of the Roy Lichtenstein Foundation
12 A. BESANA AND A. ESPOSITO

Post-Baccalaureate Fellowships in Museum Professions established with the Atlanta

University Center (AUC) Art History + Curatorial Studies Collective. This foundation
has several times funded documentary films, sculpturing programs and it has been a
curatorial “incubator” for post-graduates in art history or related fields. The Keith
Haring Foundation is for sure the most famous example of hybridization with fashion.
With the goal of dissemination of Keith Haring’s images, the Foundation works with
a broad range of product manufacturer and marketers. Some innovative projects include
partnerhips with Comme Des Garcons, Levi’s, Tommy Hilfiger, Vilac, and Adidas. The
Keith Haring Foundation is regularly developing projects with schools of different
curricula and grades for design and fabrics to be connected according to inspirations
of Keith Haring. These collaborations can be framed as hybridizations, when art is
inspiring and innovating fashion. These projects do not only involve and commit the
foundation and schools. Museums, media, universities, not-American schools (like
Collegio Villoresi in Monza) and administrations (like libraries and research centers)
are committed and active players, so that art-keting includes from art patronages to
product innovation. All here-mentioned foundations have growing assets, which are
positively correlated with all here investigated variables and they have accrued their
fundraising in order to support their stable growth.

Conclusion
In the context of community development, artist-endowed foundations supply creativity
and assets for projects, media and styles with an explicit focus on income generation.
With fashion, they allow the growth of economic and creative assets for both arts and
fashion production. While supporting local projects, they can be linked with broader
agenda for global development when arts and fashion match for the bilateral benefit,
welfare and gain. Art-keting includes multiple phenomena, with increasing and binding
commitments: from art patronages to art production, from synergies to contaminations
and deeply collaborating hybridizations.
The magnitude of engagements of several stakeholders, businesses, partnerships and
the growth of assets, it is confirmed by data and multiple regression of the sample
and as it concerns artist-endowed foundations and their commitment to fashion.
The here investigated sample has assets, whose growth is granted with different
strategies: from fundraising to investing, from sales to connecting with different stake-
holders. Revenues can therefore include contributions, program service revenue, invest-
ment income, rental income and multiple sources, so that grants are maximized (Figure
1), combining creativity and fashion. As a consequence, art-keting can follow in all
phenomena here investigated.
The focus on fashion was here commented as one of the leading goals both for
community relevance, income generation and social impact. It’s not only a matter of
museum and museification. The added value can be both for arts and creative indus-
tries, for their supply chains out of museums and for the welfare of citizens and
tourists.
During the pandemic, foundations stopped and stabilized partnerships for
post-pandemic. After the fear, boards and governances had to focus on management
of key-relations and allocation of scarce resources in order not to collapse and to plan
 The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society 13

the recovery. Relationship marketing was pivotal in order to maintain connections and
media, from websites o social media granted this ‘crisis communication.’ If partnerships
were meant by a high level of engagement, deep interaction, bidirectional exchange
of interdependencies, and sharing of resources, risks, revenues and benefits, they had
to be postponed in such frames. Some partnerships were revised for addressing
deep-rooted, new and complex social issues like the unemployment of artists or the
emergence of online creative supplies, as long as new segments and their
willingness-to-pay could be detected. Some partnerships were meant to enable fashion
and arts to take on larger social agendas, tougher issues, revenue maximization and
diversification, and longer-term challenges, as a master plan during and after pandemic.
During these times, with fashion looking for innovative media and ways of both
physical and virtual presence, the connection with artist-endowed foundation is an
inspiring and fertilizing framework. Innovations of both contents and processes of
fashion and arts can be further developed with art foundations, which can be funded
by fashion brands. These foundations will be investigated in the very next research.
Next to this topic, fashion and tourism they will be given evidence for their multiple
opportunities, from tours at house museums of fashion stylists to maison, from extraor-
dinary exhibitions in art museums to iconic landscapes, where fashion is contaminating
the urban (and not only urban) architecture.
The complexity and creativity of these connections are growing rapidly and they
are available to be monitored and benchmarked for other creative and manufacturing
industries. Fashion and arts, they are limitless.

Note
1. The differences between fashion and art are underlined also by Fashion-history. In fact, Steele
(2012) reported that fashion is an industry with a creative element, a commodity with a
commercial nature. In contrast art is a field of high cultural production associated with
a greater aesthetic realm (Steele 2012; Jelinek 2018).

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID
Angela Besana http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3576-365X
Annamaria Esposito http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0570-3149

References
Bagwell, S., D. Corry, and A. Rotheroe. 2015. “The Future of Funding: Options for Heritage
and Cultural Organisations.” Cultural Trends 24 (1): 28–33. doi: 10.1080/09548963.2014.1000583.
Berman, M., D. Major, and J. Franklin. 2017. Frameworks for Private Foundations: A New Model
for Impact. San Francisco: Foundation Center and Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors.
Besana, A., and A. Esposito. 2021. “Neither Star nor Starving! Economics and Marketing of
the Artist-Endowed Foundation.” Creative Industries Journal 14 (3): 283–12. doi:
10.1080/17510694.2020.1860620.
14 A. BESANA AND A. ESPOSITO

Budge, K., and A. Burness. 2018. “Museum Objects and Instagram: Agency and Communication
in Digital Engagement.” Continuum 32 (2): 137– 50. doi: 10.1080/10304312.2017.1337079.
Campbell, Peter, Dave O’Brien, and Mark Taylor. 2019. “Cultural Engagement and the Economic
Performance of the Cultural and Creative Industries: An Occupational Critique.” Sociology
(Sociology 53 (2): 347–67. doi: 10.1177/0038038518772737.
Caust, J. 2022. “Arts, Culture and Country.” The New Platform Papers 2:1–4.
Caves, R. 2002. Creative Industries: Contracts between Art and Commerce. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Cleopatra, C.,. M. F. Sloan, and J. S. Butler. 2021. “Capital Structure Determinants for Arts
Nonprofits.” Nonprofit Management and Leadership 31 (4): 761–82. doi: 10.1002/nml.21454.
Dion, D., and E. Arnould. 2011. “Retail Luxury Strategy: Assembling Charisma through Art
and Magic.” Journal of Retailing 87 (4): 502–20. doi: 10.1016/j.jretai.2011.09.001.
Esposito, A., and A. Besana. 2018. “US Community Foundations: building a Generous Society
in Challenging Times.” Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing 30 (2): 200–27. doi:
10.1080/10495142.2018.1452817.
Fabbricatti, K., L. Boissenin, and M. Citoni. 2020. “Heritage Community Resilience: Towards
New Approaches for Urban Resilience and Sustainability.” City, Territory and Architecture 7
(1): 1–20. doi: 10.1186/s40410-020-00126-7.
García-Ceballos, Silvia, Pilar Rivero, Sebastián Molina-Puche, and Iñaki Navarro-Neri. 2021.
“Educommunication and Archaeological Heritage in Italy and Spain: An Analysis of Institutions’
Use of Twitter, Sustainability, and Citizen Participation.” Sustainability 13 (4): 1602–25. doi:
10.3390/su13041602.
Grassi, A., S. Swindells, and S. Wigley. 2019. “The Art Foundations of Luxury Fashion Brands:
An Exploratory Investigation.” In Engaging with Fashion, edited by Carlotto F., and McCreesh
N., 60–74. Lieden, NL: Brill.
Holdgaard, N., and L. Klastrup. 2014. “Between Control and Creativity: challenging co-Creation
and Social Media Use in a Museum Context.” Digital Creativity 25 (3): 190–202. doi:
10.1080/14626268.2014.904364.
Jaskyte, Bahr K. 2019. “An Exploratory Study of Types of Innovation in US Foundations.”
Administrative Sciences 9 (4): 93–106.
Jelinek, J. S. 2018. “Art as Strategic Branding Tool for Luxury Fashion Brands.” Journal of Product
& Brand Management 27 (3): 294–307. doi: 10.1108/JPBM-01-2017-1408.
Jung, Y., and N. Vakharia. 2019. “Open Systems Theory for Arts and Cultural Organizations:
Linking Structure and Performance.” The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society 49
(4): 257–73. doi: 10.1080/10632921.2019.1617813.
Kapferer, N. 2015. On Luxury. London UK: Kogan Page.
Kapferer, J.N., and Bastien Vincent. 2012. The Luxury Strategy: Break the Rules of Marketing to
Build Luxury Brands. London: Kogan-Page.
Kastner, O. L. 2013. When Luxury Meets Art. Wiesbaden, D: Springer Gabler.
Kietzmann, J. H., K. Hermkens, I. P. McCarthy, and B. R. Silvestre. 2011. “Social Media? Get
Serious! Understanding the Functional Building Blocks of Social Media.” Business Horizons
54 (3): 241–51. doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.005.
Lam, Marcus. 2020. “Public Leadership Under Resource Constraints: An Examination of the
U.S. Nonprofit Sector.” Journal of Leadership Studies 14 (1): 89–95. doi: 10.1002/jls.21686.
Leus, M., and W. Verhelst. 2018. “Sustainability Assessment of Urban Heritage Sites.” Buildings
8 (8): 107–22. doi: 10.3390/buildings8080107.
Luhmann, N. 2000. Art as a Social System, Meridian, Crossing Aesthetics. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Masè, S. 2020. Art and Business. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature.
Massi, M., and A Turrini (eds.) 2020. The Artification of Luxury Fashion Brands. Cham,
Switzerland: Springer Nature.
McQuilten, G. 2017. “The Political Possibilities of Art and Fashion Based Social Enterprise.”
Journal of Media and Cultural Studies 31 (1): 57–71.
 The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society 15

Muñoz Dueñas, Ma del Pilar, Antonio Vaamonde Liste, and Maria do Rosário Cabrita. 2020.
“The Survival of Cultural Firms: A Study of Multiple Accounting Parameters in Spain.”
Sustainability 12 (3): 1159. doi: 10.3390/su12031159.
Nemethy, S. 2021. “New, Regenerative Approaches to Sustainability: Redefining Ecosystem
Functions, Environmental Management, and Heritage Conservation.” Ecocycles 7 (2): 86–91.
doi: 10.19040/ecocycles.v7i2.212.
Passebois-Ducros, J., J. F. Trinquecoste, and F. Pichon. 2015. “Stratégies D’artification Dans le
Domaine du Luxe Le Cas Des Vins de Prestige.” Décisions Marketing 80:109–24. doi: 10.7193/
DM.080.109.124.
Petrov, J. 2019. Fashion, History, Museum. London, UK: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Poling, J. 2021 “Art in the Time of Frugality: Scarcity, Cooperation, and Change in American
Art Museums.” Sociological forum 36 (1): 226–247.
Qian, Haifeng, and Shiqin Liu. 2018. “Cultural Entrepreneurship in U.S. Cities.” Journal of Urban
Affairs 40 (8): 1043–65. doi: 10.1080/07352166.2018.1468223.
Rentschler, R., and W. Reid. 2021. “Theorizing Arts Governance: Mapping the Influence of
Context, Creativity and Funding Paradigms for Future Research Prospects.” International
Journal of Arts Management 24 (1): 4–16.
Rushton, M. 2014. “Hybrid Organizations in the Arts: A Cautionary View.” The Journal of Arts
Management, Law, and Society 44 (3): 145–52. doi: 10.1080/10632921.2014.936075.
Saxton, G. D., and L. Wang. 2014. “The Social Network Effect: The Determinants of Giving
through Social Media.” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 43 (5): 850–68. doi:
10.1177/0899764013485159.
Shapiro, R. 2019. “Artification as a Process.” Cultural Sociology 13 (3): 265–75. doi:
10.1177/1749975519854955.
Shapiro, R., and N. Heinich. 2012. “When is Artification?” Contemporary Aesthetics 9 (4): 1–17.
Shih, T.-Y. 2018. “Determinants of Enterprises Radical Innovation and Performance: Insights
into Strategic Orientation of Cultural and Creative Enterprises.” Sustainability 10 (6): 1871–
93. doi: 10.3390/su10061871.
Steele, V. 2012. “Fashion.” In Fashion and Art, edited by Geczy, A., and Karaminas, V., 13–27.
New York: Berg- Bloomsbury Publishing.
Strom, H. A., T. H. Olsen, and L. Foss. 2020. “Tensions for Cultural Entrepreneurs Managing
Continuous Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review.” International Journal of Arts
Management 23 (1): 61–78.
Thorisdottir, T. S., and L. Johannsdottir. 2019. “Sustainability within Fashion Business Models:
A Systematic Literature Review.” Sustainability 11 (8): 2233. doi: 10.3390/su11082233.
Vincent, C. J. 2018. The Artists as Philanthropist. Strengthening the Next Generation of
Artist-Endowed Foundations. A Study of the Emerging Artist-Endowed Foundation Field in the
U.S. Study Report Supplement 2018. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute.
Wallenberg, L. 2020. “Art, Life and the Fashion Museum: For a More Solidarian Exhibition
Approach.” Fashion and Textiles 7 (1): 1–16. doi: 10.1186/s40691-019-0201-5.
Yum, Seungil. 2020. “The Relationship Between Creative Industries and the Urban Economy in
the USA.” Creative Industries Journal 13 (2): 95–116. doi: 10.1080/17510694.2019.1668741.