Showing posts with label museums. Show all posts
Showing posts with label museums. Show all posts

Sunday, November 09, 2008

From Taipei, Part 2


Spent a really interesting morning on Saturday with Wanchen' s students from the Fu Jen Catholic University. Their task was to read an evaluation report I had sent them, comment on it and raise questions. They did a really good job, considering that some of the reports were rather complex and long! The questions they raised came under the following categories (which I think I'll use when reorganising my website as part of the general Museum website rebuild project).

Planning an evaluation:

  • Working with those who commissioned the evaluation (for example, exhibition project teams, program managers, other staff and specialists)
  • Understanding the content of the program to be evaluated
  • Developing the evaluation questions – what do we already know and what are the gaps?
  • Determining the target audience
  • Designing the method

Undertaking the evaluation:

  • Different methods (questionnaires, online surveys, focus groups, in-depth interviews, tracking, observations)
  • Sampling – how to maximise sample based on target audience; determining the sample size; maximising response rates
  • Working with consultants

Analysing results/writing the report:

  • How to write reports that people will read (for example, layering information, including Executive summaries)
  • Mixture of text and facts/figures
  • Identifying what it all means

Applying the findings:

  • How to get findings accepted
  • How to use the findings in planning future programs
  • Engaging and involving staff in the evaluation (below are points from one of my Monday papers):
    • Include staff in planning the evaluation
    • Involve staff in the data gathering phases – attend focus groups, conduct surveys, undertake observations
    • Work through the findings together – the final report should never be a surprise
    • Include staff in debriefs – and have an open discussion at the debrief about what the findings mean both for the current exhibition/program and for future projects
    • Have an objective third-party undertake evaluation if findings may be of a sensitive or controversial nature, or when you need specialist skills
    • Use current organisational communication systems to publicise findings in usable ways
    • Use new media to disseminate information (for example make films or use sound bytes)

The session was a great and I thank you all for having me. Ended the day with visits to the Longshan Temple, Red Theatre Tea House and an awesome vegetarian restaurant including music, magic and kung-fu performances – thanks Tzu-yu, Yider and Cookie. (Oh, and also managed to buy myself a pair of nice brown boots for $41AUD!!)

Saturday, November 08, 2008

From Taipei, Part 1

Spending a few days in Taipei at the kind invitation of Dr Wanchen Liu, Director of the Graduate Institute of Museum Studies, Fu Jen Catholic University. The main objective is to talk to museum staff and students about audience research and trends in museums.

My first paper, Museum professional development and training in Australia, seemed to go quite well. The slides can be found here and I'll just quickly post some of the main points of my talk (with acknowledgement to Dr Jennifer Barrett, Museum Studies, University of Sydney).

  • There are a range of competencies for museum staff identified through COMPT (AAM) and ICTOP (ICOM)
  • COMPT note that: the "… education of museum professionals must enable them to meet current challenges and anticipate future needs of very complex organisations subject to ongoing, rapid change"
  • A good summary of tertiary courses available in Australia prepared by Museum Gallery Services Queensland can be found here
  • Weil (1990) noted that majority of museum staff with 'responsible positions' never had formal training in museology; sector is diverse; new types of museums mean need new types of skills and experiences needed; changing role of curator as no longer the single 'authoritative' voice
  • MacLeod (2001) suggested a "community of practice" approach is needed between museums, practitioners, universities and scholars to share resources, knowledge and expertise
  • Challenges facing museums: funding and sustainability; collections; change in role and authority of museums; globalisation; competition (for people's time and attention); climate change and staffing (attracting younger people as employees, Gen X and Gen Y attitudes to workplace and the ageing workforce, especially in capturing their knowledge and skills
  • The 'new (or not-so-new!) museology' (Vergo, 1989) looked at demystifying museums to reveal how they construct knowledge, while acknowledging the important role of the visitor
  • Worth revisiting the new museology in the 21st century as the imperatives of making money, being visitor-focussed, increased competition for leisure dollar and, in particular, Web 2.0 and social media mean that those museums who aren't becoming more open in their practices and engaging their various communities will become irrelevant
  • People are able to get information anywhere they want: '36% of online Americans consult Wikipedia ... [it is] is far more popular among the well-educated' (Pew Internet Report, April 2007)
  • "Web 2.0 puts users and not the organisation at the centre of the equation. This is threatening, but also exciting in that it has the potential to lead to richer content, a more personal experience." Ellis & Kelly, April, 2007)
  • My research has shown that that those who visit museums are more likely to engage with Web 2.0 tools that provide two-way interaction, such as blogs, wikis, tagging, discussion boards/forums – how are our professional development and training courses designed to meet these new and emerging forms of communication??

How might we be working in the future? Charles Handy, The Elephant and the Flea (2001):

  • Need to think about the business you are in: for museums I think it is generating and communicating knowledge and information in a variety of ways (physical sites, online, publications) through two-way interaction with a range of stakeholders
  • Workers increasingly want to believe in what they are doing
  • New models of organisations based on the information economy
  • Organisations will consist of elephants: those who are part of a structured organisation and have a defined role within it, supported by an increasing amount of fleas: workers who flit in and out of an organisation, mostly specialist skills based who are contracted by elephants. Fleas have an intense commitment to the project, not necessarily the organisation
  • Ageing, yet healthy, workforce mean there will be many more fleas available in the future
  • Gurteen (2006) Knowledge Workers: useful way to think about skills needed for the 21st century museum worker (I have blogged about this here)

What does this mean for museum professional development and training in the future?

  • Increasingly, museum workers are taking professional development into their own hands through social networking sites such as Museum 3.0 (now with over 400 members globally) and Facebook groups (for example Museum Professionals Unite Across Facebook; Learning in Museums and Galleries and Museums in the Digital age, to name just a few)
  • Who, then, is responsible for providing training and professional development?
  • Who's voice is being heard – scholars? practitioners? researchers?
  • Where are people getting information? Increasingly through online sources and less through journals and books?? For example there are now over 270 blogs listed on museumblogs.org – many of these are written by professionals/practitioners working in areas such as management, audience research, Web 2.0 and digital media, as well as general museum practice.

Museology 2.0:

  • Need to train workers to be flexible, agile and respond to change, as well as in finding creative solutions to solve problems
  • Recognise that museums need to be sustainable in funding, resources and infrastructure, and in working with their communities
  • A Web 2.0 mindset means two-way interaction, importance of networks and sharing. Recognise different ways of thinking –those under 25 years of age think everything on their computer is public unless they choose to make it private, whereas those over 25 think everything on their computer private unless they choose to make public
  • Building community through using visitor voice; visitors as partners; not teacher-student model but museum as facilitator; community contributes and has a life of its own; issue of shared authority
  • Scope/quality of information and interaction – what does this mean for our institutions?
  • ?How well-equipped are professional development programs in Australia (and indeed globally) to meet these challenges and to train/develop knowledge workers of the future?

The diagram below shows these ideas as a diagram and I am still playing around with it so any comments are welcome!

More soon,

Friday, July 25, 2008

Museum Members Programs and Web 2.0

Have been chatting away with the Manager of Australian Museum Members. They want to dip their toes into the wonderful world of social media. I was going to send them these links by email but thought it better to share them with all. Kate, you will also have to take the plunge and join Facebook to view some of these links!

  • The Canada Science and Technology Corporation have been experimenting with Facebook for membership and feedback as reported at Museums and Web 2008
  • A range of museums reported on their YouTube experiences at the recent Museums and the Web conference and the paper – Beyond Launch, Museum Videos on YouTube - is well worth a read and might give you some ideas about what your intern could do for you
    This paper by Shelley Bernstein from the Brooklyn Museum about their Web 2.0 experiences is a good overview of the state of play as they are by far doing the most in this area
  • Town Hall Gallery – they seem to run their programming via the web using a blog and an active Facebook group
  • Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery (TMAG) – they have a nice Facebook page and the TMAGgots is pretty cool too

Kate, also check out the Australian Museum Eureka Prize fan page – I am (and will continue to) upload sound files to the site of people's experiences which is what you seem to want to do for your events. I can show you how to do this pretty easily, now that my intern Vanessa, worked it all out for us. We are using this as a test case to log the time it takes and also how people actually found out about the site (beyond just mine and Ruth's friend that is!) - so far, so good.

Just sending you that meeting request now...

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Educational websites

Barbara Piscitelli was asking me about useful websites for museum and gallery education.

Museums/galleries:

Barbara – you'll see here I selected mostly gallery websites as I know that's your interest.

Online educational resources:

I know this is only a taste – it's a huge web world out there, the trick is to subscribe to a few things rather than a lot. To that end, for those folks who don't already know – we have a large online network called Museum 3.0 with over 240 members. Feel free to sign up and continue these conversations – we're having a discussion about education on there right now! It's the one-stop shop for all things museum and gallery-related.

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Measuring impact of museums

This from Elena Starkova in Russia: Dear Lynda, I am conducting a research on measurement the attitudes of local population towards new museum in Perm, Russia. I would like to know what do people think about the new museum, its project and conception, what do they believe in, are they in favour or not of building a new museum. Here is the website of architectural competition and the concept of the museum. I decided to use a questionnaire to measure attitudes. I read your paper for Intercom Conference 2006, called "Measuring the impact of museums on their communities: The role of the 21st century museum" and I found it very related to my research. At this moment I am looking for a good valid instrument for measurement such as questionnaire or technique for measurement the attitudes for visitors/non-visitors towards museum especially new museum that I can apply for me case. I would really appreciate if you send me the questionnaires that you used for conducting a research about measuring the impact of the museums on community. Also, if there are some other researches you made on related topics and if you have any scales that I can apply for my research and make a valid and reliable questionnaire. Best regards,

Best regards to you too Elena. Your project sounds really exciting. That paper from the INTERCOM conference is online – I have a whole section on my wiki called impact of museums with papers and links. I will send you some questionnaires separately. Also you could refer to the recent blog post in response to a question from TMAG about getting public response to redevelopment plans – that may be an easier way to get quick feedback. Perhaps you'll need to do both – that is, measure attitudes towards having a new museum through a quantitative survey and finding out what it should be though a more qualitative approach.

One word of caution Elena. I don't know what the funding situation is like in Russia but too often in Australia new museums are created and opened with much ceremony, however there is usually little or no budget or thought given to actually running them on a day-to-day basis so they often fail!

Best of luck Elena and please keep us updated about your progress.

Monday, May 26, 2008

Beth Kanter talk @ PHM 23 May 2008

Went to this talk today by hosted by Seb Chan at the Powerhouse Museum. Beth runs a blog How NonProfits can use social media among many, many other things.

My notes from the talk and discussion:

Web enables connections with people around topics they are interested in.

Talked us through an interesting example of using Twitter to get some responses to a specific question about travelling to Oz and what phones to use

Also talked about video blogging

It's all about connectedness and the global brain – a 50 years transition that we're in the middle of

Here comes everybody book: talks about implications for social change and renegotiating social contracts

We are all still experimenting – no secret formula yet, sooner you get on and learn and experiment the further ahead you'll be

People are making decisions through their social networks (their friends) – this is how many in younger generations are making their decisions

It's not about the list, it's about the networks – you have a network and everyone n your network has a network and so on

Neilsenbuzzmetrics report looked at where the trust factor is – recommendations from consumers were the number one source people trust (this includes things like writing on your Facebook wall!)

Younger people have reference for communicating through social networks – and they don't necessarily see that work colleagues and the way they talk to their friends is any different

Information comes to me, I don't go and find it (Russ also talked about this as pushing content to people not pulling them in)

Read rates of e-newsletters are pretty low at around 30% - it's all about pushing through, need to find other methods

Need to think about audiences as fans – need to cultivate your fans who don't see one show but will come to you again and again

Beth talked though a fundraising example using social networks – question was how can I use a range of social media tools to raise money? For the Sharing Foundation campaign sought opinions for audience/readers as well as identifying those who were evangelists for the cause and could take it up.

Strategy – make it personal (psychology of influence) not institutional

What about being just one person? Look at the ladder of engagement of givers – instigators, evangelists, donors, spreaders, happy bystanders (each of these varies by participation type and involvement)

The personal fundraiser does the network weaving

Tell a personalised story rather than statistics about an anonymous many

Relationship building using those people that you already know and their networks

Rewards and reciprocity (people will treat you as they have been treated)

Need to give your fans the viral tools to spread the message

Birthday Flickr project remix example – used as a test for people on Flickr to remix fotos and prize was $50 donated to cause of their choice

There will be a special interest group out there about you and your content that you can leverage

Timing is critical – make it close to the opening of the exhibit for example

Important message – let go, you lose control but you gain a lot

Takes time – don't get immediate results, might take several experiments before you leverage a network

How do we gather our evangelists? Museums are still using traditional methods to broadcast to them

Brought up Nina Simon's blog post about how much time Web 2.0 takes which was worth revisiting

Showed David Wilcox changing power relationships slide – a change from top down to bottom up

The long tail of Facebook post – donation base small but reach is very large, frogloop care2 as an example of how to optimise online fundraising

Groundswell by Li and Bernoff – Seb has reviewed this book on fresh+new(er)

Overall, a really worthwhile session – Beth posted an interview with me to her blog too (umm, don't look at the foto!!). Also interesting to see that the PHM staff have the same questions and worries that Australian Museum staff have too – more work for Seb and I to do I fear!

Monday, May 19, 2008

Museums Australia Futures Forum May 2008

Quite a morning with the six provocative papers and some comments from Frank regarding his attendance at the 2020 Summit and recent travels. Some points across the board that I took away:

  • People will make decisions based on the information they have available now – not on what could be made available (i.e. people don't know what it is we don't have)
  • Museums need to be more innovative and look at government departments that have problems our collections could help solve/add value to (e.g. climate change; genetic resources; potential in cultural collections in mapping cultural landscapes across Australia)
  • We need to use our own websites but travel across the web – using the already available places where people already visit online (Flickr, YouTube, etc). Made the point that we tour our exhibitions to physical sites – we also need to tour the web
  • We aren't in the innovation landscape
  • 'We have a broader attention span and a shorter absorption time'
  • 'Gymnastic minds of today's audiences – we can and do jump around!
  • Rip, mix and burn experiences

    rip – take your favourite stuff

    mix – mix them up

    burn – publish!

  • How do we devise systematic strategies to engender creativity?
  • Practice-led research?
  • Research methods are needed that can cope with complexity and mess

In the afternoon I joined the Learning for Life group which had an interesting discussions about how we link learning and museums in people's minds and what we would ask Minister Garrett for. They liked some of the points I made in my provocative paper about unsexy audiences and moving beyond the entertainment/learning/education debate, as well as catering for people in their own place and time.

I then went to the Digitisation group and got hold of Seb's final points about the challenges for museums in this area:

  • Not a technical issue
  • Need to prioritise digitisation for high volume public access
  • Obtaining maximal rights and permissions
  • Letting go of sole ownership, embracing connectedness
  • Aligning strategies with audiences
  • Asserting brand value as interpretation and engagement, not raw content
  • The web as centre, not peripheral to the organisation

[BTW these points are ©Seb Chan under strict copyright orders from him!! Right you are there Seb!]

This was followed by a rather spirited discussion... and then the ICOM Australia AGM, including the launch of our new website.

Saturday, May 10, 2008

Learning vs education vs entertainment??

This question popped up from Ken at lunch yesterday: What are visitors seeking from cultural attractions in terms of education and/or entertaining experiences? Can these co-exist?

Well Ken, since you don't want to read my thesis online, or even Chapter 7 which answers these questions I will summarise it for you here. Watch out for a future edition of Curator where these findings will be published in more detail.

When comparing the concepts of learning, education and entertainment four differences emerged:

  • the general language used to explain each concept differed, with more active words used to talk about learning, such as discovering, exploring, applying and experiencing and participants describing education in more concrete ways
  • previous research established that people had generally negative views of education as a passive process over which they had no control, yet in my study negative views of education expressed emanated from a perceived lack of choice
  • although there were differences in the language used to describe these concepts, there was still an appreciation of the role that education played in both acquiring facts and information, and in delivering learning, and unlike some of the studies reviewed in the literature, education was not seen as necessarily negative, just different
  • in contrast to learning and education, descriptions of entertainment included words and phrases that were based on feelings and emotions.

I suggested that the museum environment allows the concepts of learning, education and entertainment to closely overlap in positive ways as shown in the diagram below. Overall I concluded that learning, entertainment and education are not competing concepts or opposites — they are complementary. Museums should not be concerned about their entertainment value and role, as results indicated that adult visitors felt that entertainment added to learning, not detracted from it, and overall, museums should promote themselves as places for enjoyable and entertaining learning experiences.


The relationship between learning, education and entertainment

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Thoughts on web trends 2008

Have been reading some sites looking at trends in the web world for 2008 (thanks mostly to Russ and Phil). Here’s what I’ve learned and how I think these trends apply to museums.
1. The rise of mobile technologies: Does this mean museum websites will need to operate on a range of mobile platforms? Do we encourage content from people wherever they happen to be? There is enormous potential I see for fieldwork/fieldguides that are updated live by people who are actually there researching/seeing the world as it happens - just one idea, I’m sure there are heaps of others.
2. Archiving: How to archive the massive amounts of information that not only comes via email, but posted on sites such as MySpace and Facebook. How do you archive work-related conversations, posts, links etc, that are starting to amass on these sites? I strongly believe that good old paper is the way to go (just reinforced as I re-read Plutarch’s Fall of the Roman Republic preserved for all that time on paper...)
3. E-learning tools are more accessible and easy to use: Larry Ferlazzo’s website lists the 14 best web applications for education. Many of these could be used by museums in their online learning programs, or at least stream content to them somehow?
4. Organisational issues: “Managers [and employees?] will need to be more creative and less obsessed with cost and efficiency” and “Stop competing against your competitors [as] your traditional rivals aren’t your biggest worry” – these come from BusinessWeek’s Innovation Predictions 2008. There a many lessons for museums in working together which is often easier to do in the online world. Bigger funding pots will come from partnership programs in the future I believe. The skills that I posted here about Knowledge Workers could form part of a checklist for future organisational development? The McKinsey Quarterly eight trends to watch article also has a wealth of insights into organisational issues and the web.
5. Collaboration: The Guardian’s Top 10 trends for 2008 include interesting insights into how companies will collaborate more with their online users and work differently with them. Museums have the opportunities to tap into a huge resource of “armchair experts” to add rich content and commentary to their online offerings – have a look at the article Open Source Science which discussed this some time ago. Not a new idea I know but the tools of the web will enable collaboration to be undertaken more easily, quickly and efficiently (and cheaply!!). The McKinsey article also discusses this issue and provides an example of Amazon enabling other businesses to use its services and in turn reaps the benefits of new applications and developments.
6. The rise of co-creation and (I also think) of an informed and active citizenry on a global scale: Nina Simon’s post outlines a challenge for co-creation to find the right questions. She references this wonderful site – The World Question Centre. Will co-creation become the new buzz term replacing social media and Web 2.0? I have also posted a range of links on my del.icio.us site of organisations that are ones to look out for in terms of active citizenry. You can search for them using the tag “climatechangeARC”.
7. Mash-ups: Now I understand what this term means couldn’t help but use it! The McKinsey article discusses data integration under Managing capital and assets as part of “leveraging information in new ways”. For museums the challenge will be to store and share data – will we have the courage and foresight to insist on using tools and systems that will enable easy data sharing across our institutions?
8. Search, analytics and measurement will become increasingly important: CMS Watch’s Twelve Predictions for 2008 discusses this (as well as several other gems). We are seeing discussions about user-led searching, particularly with the Powerhouse Museum’s OPAC 2.0 (here’s the most recent blog post about it, trackback from there for more). There are also useful discussions about web analytics on Seb’s blog. Museums will need to get serious and go beyond measuring numbers to detailing interactions and experiences – something that audience researchers have successfully moved to in looking at visitors’ physical experiences. Perhaps a future new role for those of use working in this field?
9. Gadgets and gizmos: Have a look at the Sydney Morning Herald and BBC websites. I want a Chumby!
10. Finally, again from CMS Watch which is worth reproducing in full here: “What should you do? Keep focussed on specific business objectives. Someone in your enterprise should be thinking about The Next Big Thing, but not at the expense of undertaking the hard work of real information and process analysis today.” As mentioned in an earlier post, Peter Drucker discussed these ideas in his book Managing in Turbulent Times (which on re-reading is so relevant to today even though it was written in 1980!).
I know there are many more so feel free to add your thoughts.

Saturday, November 10, 2007

Lifelong Learning Symposium

What a full day of fascinating papers delivered by passionate people! I took a wad of notes, so will report here on the main points as I saw them.
David's paper was (as always) a broad sweep of the intellectual and the practical. He suggested that we need to tackle barriers of poverty, education disadvantage, disabilities and other issues facing older peole. He reminded us that museums can still be seen as elitist places and that we need to cater for all audiences and not spend too much time always segmenting.
The thing I enjoyed abut Marie's talk was the emphasis on learning as pleasure, fun and enjoyment - words we often forget to relate to musuems! The NGI is running some amazing programs, not just for older audiences - one I think is really innovative is the young mothers tours.
Des's talk ranged widely, reminding us that often with ageing we focus on the negative rather than the positive. The ageing population shouldn't be seen as a problem to be solved but as a "demographic bounty" to be used. He cited many, many examples of creativity in older life - apart from artists and classical composers we also saw images of Mick Jagger and Paul McCartney! The three aspects regarding ageing he mentioned were:
  • the positives - the creativity, wisdom and life experience of older people
  • inter-individual variability and the need to have a wide palette - all older people are not the same and there is more variation between two 80 year olds as between two 40 year olds
  • reduced reserve - therefore providing spaces to relax, recharge and contemplate are required
He reminded us that the majority of older people are fit, heatlty and contributing, however those that are sick do tend to have more complex health issues. He also gave us a nice quote (didn't get the author but worth reproducing): "If you design for the old you include the young, if you design for the young you exclude the old". The overall message I got was to have a complex palette on offer and design for all.
Catherine's talk on vounteering was full of information. The remarks she made about the 21st century volunteer were very salient - that they are looking for an experience and added-value and that there are so many more opportunities to volunteer now (I have seen the increase of volunteer tourism for example). She challenged us to remember that volunteers are changing so are we trying to fit them into a 20th century volunteer model or are we trying to change?
There were other papers and a great discussion at the end - too much to digest now, but overall a great success I feel.
Just a reminder that my paper is here

Friday, November 09, 2007

Lifelong Learning Conference Roundtable

Attended this session yesterday and found it really inspiring. There certainly is a lot of innovative work and thinking going on in Ireland about all audiences, not just older ones.
There was quite a focus on reminiscence, which is something that really interests me as it isn't dealt with in Australia at all I feel, although on reflection some of the digital stories we are doing with Indigenous communities and objects is getting there. The work of the Age Exchange in London was mentioned as a good resource, particularly for developing reminiscence kits.
Another thing that struck me was the work at the Ulster Museum and the Ireland Museum of Modern Art where they used older groups to actually produce product for them in terms of the reminiscence boxes at Ulster and various programming initiatives at IMMA. The poetry/writers group that uses the National Gallery of Ireland was also very inspiring, and often brought a tear to the eye (actually everything about the Gallery is incredibly impressive and has given me a lot to think about in terms of programming at my Museum).
Seems that collaboration is the key, while also considering (and planning for) sustainabilty after grant fudidng finishes. One of the challenges raised was that museums need to develop outreach programs for a variety of community groups, not just a traditional focus on schools. I think there is a lesson there for our Museum in a Box program - some of the potential audiences discussed at the roundtable were offenders; those with dementia; ethnic minorities; users of mental health services; those that are housebound (not just the elderly or with disabilities - think young mums) and intergenerational groups.
All in all a fine day, topped with a wonderful dinner in a beautiful part of the gallery.

Tuesday, August 07, 2007

University museums engaging university students

This question from Sebastian Moody:

Hello Lynda,
My name is Sebastian Moody I am a Masters student in Museum Studies at the University of Queensland. I have commenced a case study of how university museums engage with the wider student population.

I was hoping that you would be able to inform me about other research that has been done in this area.


Sebastian - I don't know of any studies in this area - maybe some of our university museums colleagues could advise?

Sunday, August 05, 2007

Measuring the impact of museums in their local communities

I have been asked to be a member of a steering committee established by Museums & Galleries NSW (mgNSW) to work on the Regional Audience Development Study. So how do we measure the impact of museums in their local communities? This is an issue that will continue to be of relevance to a broad range of museum folk across a range of institution types and sizes.

There have been two studies that I have been involved in that have looked at this issue from the local museum perspective. All the relevant papers and links from those studies can be viewed and downloaded on the measuring impact page on my audience research wiki. Some of the papers came from doing a simple Google search called "impact of museums", so there is a lot of available reference material.

I'd be interested in hearing about any other studies that people know of or have been involved in.

Thursday, June 28, 2007

Climate Change and Museums

Fiona Cameron asked me about audience research we have done on the topic of climate change. We conducted several studies as part of a larger research project investigating future exhibition topics.

The first study in 2006 consisted of two quantitative surveys — one with an online sample of 538 respondents from the greater Sydney region (mix of visitors and non-visitors to museums and galleries); and one with 319 visitors to the Australian Museum. Climate Change was chosen as the preferred exhibiton topic by 21% of online respondents and by 22% of the onsite sample. It was of high interest to 39% of Australian Museum visitors and 26% of online respondents.

Why is this topic so appealing? A range of reasons were given by respondents:

* It’s an important subject that we all need to know about:
“I think climate change should be of interest to everybody because it is our future. Will we survive?”
“I think we need to know more about climate change as it’s already happening.”
“Topical and at the forefront of everyone’s attention. Will foster necessary public debate. Is of great interest to all ages and backgrounds.”


* It’s a topic that children need to be educated about:
“Climate change is an important issue and one that I could take my children to see and discuss.”
“Educating the community and my kids about this pressing issue so we can make immediate changes.


* There is a lot of misinformation around and we can trust the Museum to give us the real facts:
“I think we need to know more unbiased reasonably proven facts regarding climate change.”
“Climate change is very current and something that the whole world, and even more, needs more in-depth study, shown and interpreted for us normal people out here.”


* We need to know what we can do:
“… we all need to be made aware, with tangible examples, of what’s happening and how we can help.”
“Climate’s a very good indicator of the environment, must learn so we can save the planet before things go very wrong.”


The second study in 2007 consisted of focus groups with a range of target audiences to unpack the issues further. Again, climate change was clearly the most popular exhibition topic across all groups because:

* It’s an issue that’s become personal
* In the past 12 months, the issue has moved beyond the realm of science into the mainstream
* The sense of personal responsibility has started to hit home
* People are confused and overwhelmed – can’t trust politicians, industry or lobby groups
* With all the media coverage and THAT MOVIE, there is significant background knowledge, but much of it is contradictory, making the issue even more confusing!
* With so much conflicting information regarding climate change, audiences are craving an authority on the issue to clear things up once and for all, and assist them in adopting a stance

We found that participants felt the Museum was in a perfect position to be that authority, as audiences see us as:
* A trusted source of scientific information and not aligned to a political party, lobby group or big business partner:
"It’s a perfect fit for the Museum, it’s science!"
"I think the Museum has a great chance to be the authority on this issue, people trust the Museum and its science."


Some questions people wanted an exhibition to help them with were:
What are acceptable levels of warming?
What are the possible outcomes, at varying degrees of warming?
Are these changes due to emissions or part of normal cycles?
What is our ability to reverse the effects?
What can I personally do?
What is renewable energy and what is its role in beating climate change?
How does my everyday existence contribute now?
Is there a tipping point, and have we passed it?


So, the interest is there, what are museums and like institutions doing about it??

Monday, June 25, 2007

Logging On: Culture, participation and the web

Reading this interesting report at the moment - Logging On: Culture, participation and the web. Published on the Demos website and written by John Holden, it is a fascinating account of a major online initiative funded by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in the UK. Some of the key points I picked up [my comments in square brackets]:
* Trends in internet developments show move from passive --> active; unidirectional --> interactive and from few --> many
* Early use of internet in museums was to digitise content
* 2007 use of internet was transformed in the UK through uptake of broadband with the net becoming the primary way that people access information. As well online commerce has transformed the music and film industries [who have had to respond to the illegal use of downloading to making it easy to do and minimal cost]
* “Rather than people using technology to adapt to their own needs, they are now using the capacity and functionality of technology to create and shape new potential.” (p.17)
* “... new web tools, greater computing power, better connectivity and increased uptake have changed the perception of the cultural possibilities of the internet from being a passive pool of digital information to being a vibrant fourth dimensions of life with limitless opportunities for interaction.” (p.17)
* Museums need strategy of user-generated content – this was why culture online was successful in actively engaging young people and adults in generating their own content
* The organisations in the pilot learned, as well as users developing their own IT skills and deeper understanding of the content
* [lessons for us – share resources such as developer expertise and project management; build projects across institutions and content areas. Is climate change/sustainability one we could do in Sydney?? Indigenous/Pacific stories are another]
* Lessons section (p.33 on):
# Need an external broker to bring partners together
# Clear project plan, roles and responsibilities
# Some institutions not used to rigorous project management systems – through the commissioning process gave them contractual obligations to deliver
# Need absolute clarity about who creates, controls [and signs off on] content
# IP needs to be sorted
# Need a recognised and established lead partner (i.e. the big museums) who can bring organisational resources to the project
# Start small-scale and move up from there
* Challenges:
# Bureaucracy often want control – therefore be clear on goals and responsibilities up-front
# Focus on user means that child protection is a big issue
# Sustainability needs to be factored in
# Need specialists in both the technology and the content [and the audience??]
* Useful section on moderation pp.39-40
* The Tate considers its website as the 5th gallery
* People don’t want to abandon the physical object, just want to find new ways to communicate about it
* “New web tools enable users collectively to express their preferences through their actions, without having to be asked.” (p.44)
* All the tools that Web 2.0 offers "... extend beyond simply the digitisation of data to models of linking and sharing information." (p.45)

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

A review of literature on audience research and evaluation for museum websites

There is a clear conception within the literature of the potential within the museum area for online development, given the already inherent value a museum has in terms of its reservoir of high quality content, often with its own intellectual property rights, and an established reputation for quality information provision, objectivity, and authority. (Both Daniel Cunliffe et al and Tom Hennes make similar points).

The challenge for museums on the web is to take advantage of and develop this potential, creating an online entity that is not just a pale reflection of the physical museum, but an exciting expansion into new ways of accessing, interacting with, exploring and developing resources held by museums.

Historically website design has been focused on the visual design, and when overhauling their sites, institutions such as museums may be faced with redesigning a site that may still ‘look’ good, but behind the scenes is dysfunctional, based on obsolete code and almost impossible to add to or update in a simple manner. Added to this is the challenge of addressing web 2.0 issues, including a desire to make the site more interactive and to bring the user into content manipulation and production. This adds another area of concern, with challenges to issues of control and management.

The literature shows that there are basic criteria to assess website usability and audience/user profiles that have been developed over the last 10-15 years, and these are seen as working effectively when applied as a group, rather than depending on any one method or aspect. A clear consensus emerges in regards to key issues.

These include: the necessity of usability testing, assessment and research at all stages of the web development process; the development of user profiles, as virtual users cannot be assumed to match physical visitors, about whom much research has already been done; the importance of a conceptual approach to the site, where the site is not just a reflection of the physical museum but an active entity in itself; and finally situating the virtual museum within a marketplace context.

To achieve this, the agreement is that there needs to be a lot of preparation, research, testing, trials and then more testing.

The earliest article, Usability Evaluation for Museum Websites, offers a thorough analysis of these criteria, which include:
1. user testing- with prototypes within the museum, monitor and observe interaction behaviour, use feedback. The user is usually given a set of tasks to carry out and is monitored. Can be monitored by video, think aloud protocol, observer’s notebook (problems include finding a typical user).
2. interviews- questionnaires about a prototype, an existing site, or ongoing feedback. Could be done via a kiosk in the museum.
3. log file analysis- looking at the data gathered automatically, includes such info as number of hits, type of platform, where the user came from, time spent on page and quite a lot more (problems include amount of data, relevance of data, interpretation, identification of unique visitors, caching) Then how do you extrapolate intention from info – why from what?
4. online questionnaires/feedback – the two major concerns are: self selection of sample; and response rate to draw reliable conclusions. Often there is a low response rate (between 2 and 5%)
5. Heuristic evaluation – doesn’t involve users, evaluates site against a set of agreed criteria or guidelines, research already available.
6. Procedures for ongoing maintenance and development must also be considered.

The article Audiences, Visitors, Users: Reconceptualising Users of Museum On-line Content and Services expands on these criteria to develop a more formal set of principles for web site development and evaluation. They put museum web site development into the context of the marketplace and come up with six design principles:
• acknowledge the marketplace web sites exist within
• have clear site goals, from the perspectives of the market, user, and organisation
• design in relation to these goals
• design an information space, not a museum replica
• test with target users at all stages, many times
• evaluate in terms of your goals, not just according to user demographic or products on site.

There are many examples in the literature (SFMOMA, Museum of Victoria) of organisations that take these basic criteria and offer case studies on how they apply them to their own redesigns, the challenges that emerged, and how effective the process was.
Some general points that come from these case studies are:
o Usability is important in developing an effective, interesting and user friendly website.
o There is a connection between website usage and attendance, however the audiences do not necessarily correlate completely.
o The different approaches – heuristic, user surveys, questionnaires, log file data – all contribute to a more complete picture of users and usability.
o How a user gets to the site is largely based on internet searches, rather than access through the home page.
o Museums have a very active role to play in developing their physical content for the online environment, and need to look at issues of intellectual property, copyright, etc.
o There is a lot of potential for museum sites – both directly and indirectly related to their physical role (see Hennes, Sherry Hsi)
o There are more novel methods of assessing user interaction for example the kiosk approach of the Exploratorium that can have a role in website evaluation.
o Web 2.0 – do the users want it? How do museums implement it in ways that do not threaten users, or waste resources? (see SFMOMA article, fresh and new blog re percentage of active users vs passive)
o How then do museums assess the use of this interactive content – data file analysis has not yet caught up with server side includes, active content, feeds etc.

Overall, for those embarking on web site redesign, or initial design, there is already a good body of research and practical examples to draw on for methods, ideas and examples. The challenge of web 2.0 and how to assess the role it plays in website assessment and audience research wil be another are for research and assessment over the next few years, as museums continue to take up the challenge of implementing web 2.0 concepts and ideas.