Lab Museum Design & Interpretation

What could be better?  That’s what I was thinking to myself when this morning’s mail brought my desk copy of Herman T. Tavani’s Ethics and Technologies, and Strategies for Ethical Computing (Third Edition).   I know that sounds crazy but I’ve been at odds with myself for the past six months trying to decide where I was going to locate the desk (my mother’s Paul McCobb Planner Group Secretary) I use for my primary work.  Two weekends ago I made Patient-Long-Suffering-Spouse help me in an intense and back-breaking game of musical furniture.  As a result the piano is now in the dining room, waiting for someone who can actually play the thing to sit down and fill the house with music.  The dining room table can actually be used, once again for dining.  And my work desk is where it should be, in the designated room that we’ve always referred to as “my” office  (probably used to be an enclosed sun porch) but that desk was taken over by PLSS for dealing with household finances.  So now there are two desks, he only uses the finance desk in the mornings before work, and for a brief time in the afternoon after work, and the rest of the time the office is mine, all mine.  So for today, at least, I am playing the absent–minded professor. I’ve sent the boys (husband and son) off to pursue their own plans and I’m happily ensconced at my desk with a textbook at my side and a syllabus to revise for my Johns Hopkins students.

Share:

New Spice: Study Like a Scholar, Scholar

Share:

Spent a fascinating day today in San Antonio at a MIDEA Workshop on Social Media.  MIDEA is an acronym for the Marcus Institute for Digital Education and the Arts.  In terms of full disclosure, I’m the lead blogger for the MIDEA blog, so I’m writing this both as an employee and a participant.  The workshop brought together more than 50 museum professionals from across the country, but with a predominant number of delegates from Texas museums.  The Marcus Foundation has consistently supported art education in Texas and has now branched out and is supporting this organization which is designed to serve arts-related institutions across the nation and across the world.  Friends Peter Samis and Susan Chun were also in attendance, Peter with his inevitable wise words on almost every topic (I love Peter) and Susan gave a terrific presentation on strategic planning for social media in museums.

Larry Johnson, the CEO of NMC had invited me to kick-off the workshop and I so I offered the group some reflections upon the history of museums in United States, common aphorisms, and audience satisfaction.  And much to my delight Rachel Smith was visually recording the session and posted the following photograph condensing what I said into the image below.  Thanks Rachel.

The best thing about the day was listening to the presentations and ideas and commentaries of the really bright young people who are working in museums today.  They are transforming the landscape and we (who are bowed at the shoulders, with creaky bones and joints) should take advantage of their enthusiasms and allow them to show us  museums and audiences through their eyes much more often.   A big shout out to Lillian from the San Angelo Museum of Fine Arts.  You rock girl!

And…swallowing my words….

Lo many moons ago in this blog I declared my intention (in musical parody) never to tweet.  But today, June 30, 2010, I take it all back.  I’m tweeting–but sparingly–one tweet a day, an object from a museum somewhere in the world.  You can follow me on twitter as @hwitchey.

Share:

(This posting is based on my presentation at AAM’s recent Technology, Interpretation & Education online conference in a session with Nancy Proctor. What’s that? You missed it? Shame on you, it was an excellent two-day conference. No worries, it was recorded. Check AAM’s Professional Development website).

Smaller, cheaper, faster, better – The promise of technology. Isn’t technology meant to make our lives easier by streamlining workflows, eliminating manual processes and supporting our administrative, interpretative and educational initiatives? That’s the myth. While technology is often smaller and faster, the reality is that technology sometimes isn’t better (shock, horror) and it definitely isn’t the cheap option. Technology may not be cheap, but done right it is a great investment. However, technology done badly can be an expensive mistake and that gives many the impression that technology doesn’t work and is an expensive waste of time. As museum technologists we struggle with this image.

In our current financial situation technology can be the soft target when we’re looking at our budgets, a second-class citizen struggling to convey its true value. I sometimes see technology as the sporting equivalent of a benchwarmer – a dispensable player who can be removed from the game without affecting its result. It’s not.

Who’s to blame for doing technology badly? No point looking around at others, we are when we don’t do our due diligence in matching solutions to requirements, or worse, when we don’t even bother to do requirements because “isn’t it obvious?”, or even worser, when we use technology for technology’s sake.

I’ve seen it many times. Applications are often a substitute for existing (manual) processes, so when we look to bring in a new application we look to replicate the processes that we have in place and are unwilling to change our ways. Third-party applications are often the result of a distillation of processes from a variety of different sources and situations into something simple. Instead of using the moment when we select technology as a time to question how we do something, we look to blindly replicate our processes with something that wasn’t designed to be as convoluted as we’ve trained ourselves to be. Bringing in technology under these conditions is a recipe for disaster.

There are any number of reasons why technology doesn’t hit the mark, but a sure-fire way is not clearly identifying the purpose and goals at the outset.

I’m reminded of a quote:

Computers make it easier to do a lot of things, but most of the things they make it easier to do don’t need to be done.

- Andy Rooney, US news commentator

But technology done right is a bit like the definition of pornography – I’ll know it when I see it. And the epitome of “technology done right” is that its transparent – its there but you don’t see it, it presents no barrier to the experience. And if we’ve done our job right, it actually enhances the experience.

The two-day Technology, Interpretation & Education conference showcased the value of technology and discussed getting it right. From the MUSE award virtual reception (thanks Jack & Suzy and congratulations to all the MUSE Award winners), to the Art Institute of Chicago on Teens and Technology: Remixing the Museum to Stephanie Weaver on Creating a Social Media Strategy to the consistently engaging Nina Simon on Developing Tools for Visitor Participation. The conference featured instances where the disciplines of education and interpretation have been brought together, supported by technology, to provide an engaging experience that represents value: a thoughtful and resonant engagement with our audiences, or more specifically, a visitor’s thoughtful and resonant engagement with us. Instances where traditional ways of interpretation and education have been replaced by elegant and meaningful solutions that further our individual missions, not necessarily using cutting-edge technology, but the right solution for the job at hand.

Technology done right is a thing beauty and a joy forever – that is, until the upgrade. But as the Chinese Curse goes: May you live in interesting times. That is certainly true of the times we are living in. And in these times we are being asked to “do more with less” – and often the instinctive answer is some technology solution. But as museum technologists and as museum professionals we’ve been tasked with “doing more with less” for many years.

We have less, so let’s do less. I think its time to focus our time and resources and “do less with less”, but “do stuff that matters”, to quote Tim O’Reilly. Tim O’Reilly also talks about “big hairy audacious goals”, but see Mike Edson for that.

“Do Less With Less”: Museum technologists always want to say yes, they are particularly good at saying yes or rather, they are bad at saying “no”. In this time of financial and resource constraint, as technologists, as content developers, and as educators, we need to create a culture where its okay to say “no” if our goal is to wisely and judicially use our skill and resources to create lasting projects of value. To misquote, Rich Cherry, Director of the Balboa Park Online Collaborative: “Don’t half-arse, just say no”.

In the short story Runaround (published in I, Robot in 1942), Isaac Asimov came up with three fundamental laws that all robots must obey:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm
2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law

I’ve come up with the Museum Technologist’s equivalent that I’d like to share with you – to make the point of doing less with less. So for us Museum Technologists, I give you the Three Laws of Museum Technology:

1. A museum technologist may not implement a technology solution that is inappropriate, uneconomic, unsustainable, unproductive, inelegant, inflexible, a closed architecture or not based on standards
2. A museum technologist must obey the opinions and decisions of a museum non-technologist except when such opinions and decisions conflict with the first law
3. A museum technologist must protect his own existence as long such protection does not conflict with the First and Second law

So, what is an inappropriate technology solution? Well, I talked about that one: not matching solutions to requirements and doing technology for technology’s sake.We technologists have, what I like to refer to as the shiny gadget gene, we see others doing something cool and there is an overwhelming urge to emulate it. Or we see others with some success and we want to do that very same thing. We are a culture of emulation, but we have to be careful that we emulate for the right reasons. We jump on the bandwagon, without thinking whether we should be on it or even sometimes thinking about where it is going. The early institutional websites were a great example of this, but now I hope we’ve individually figured out why we do all have a website. I worry that our current social networking efforts are similarly inclined. Are you clear why your institution has a Facebook page and what the plan is? Are you clear why you are capturing User Generated Content on your website, and what the plan is? Technology for technology’s sake is not doing “less with less”, its doing “more with less”. And most importantly, it violates my first law.

What about uneconomic? We have to be careful of not buying into the myth that replacing something with a technological solution is the cheap alternative, or that technology is in itself, “cheap”. In our world there is rarely an immediate return on our investment and thinking that is the case, is a problem. Technology is an ongoing investment and trying to do it on the cheap, for example selecting technology based on relative cost and ignoring the requirements (assuming you did some), will result in tears before bedtime. Unquestionably, technology can support us in our mission, help us build engaging interpretive and educational solutions, but it requires investment and commitment from the highest levels in our institutions and the returns are not hard cash, but are hopefully feet through the door, greater access to our content and meeting our missions.

And let’s not forget that Open Source Software is as free as a free puppy: no upfront cash, but years of scooping poop. Just because Social Media is cheap and easy (is it really?) should we be doing it? There is an important distinction between “cheap” and “economy”. Done wisely and judiciously, technology can be a great economy, saving time and resources over the long term. No doubt that some technology solutions absolutely can be cheap and can be a “financial economy”, but our returns on investment are about meeting mission, sustainability, preservation and access, which by their very nature, play out over the longer term. Doing “less with less” means being crystal clear that what you are about to do clearly addresses these mission-related goals.

To do less with less is to focus on the things that are core to our institutional mission, things that are being done for the right reasons which everybody is clear about, and are done in a way that maximizes resources and finances. We should plan for flexibility because we don’t know where this “thing” is going; we should plan for scalability because we don’t know how big this “thing” might get; we should use standards because we want to play and share in a much bigger arena; we should collaborate and stop trying to re-invent the wheel. And most importantly, we should address the long term – the sustainability of the things we’ve created for our institutions after we’ve moved on.

Doing less with less may also extend to how you structure your workforce. Here at the Getty we reorganized departmentally to recognize that there functional areas that shouldn’t change – such as content development – the way we interpret our collections, but there are areas that will change – how we brand our content and how we deliver it. How does doing “less with less” fit into a world where new technologies and platforms are constantly emerging? If you know something will change, at least you can plan for it with modularity in hardware, software, people or resources.

In these “interesting times”, your take on doing “less with less” may be different. Maybe “doing less with less” is to do something that creates a revenue stream, or to do something purely because its high-profile, or even to do something that is in fact technology for technology’s sake – a one-off, no-holds-barred, shiny-gadget project. Far be it from me to judge. Essentially, “doing less with less” it is to be thoughtful and appropriate in how you conduct your business and how you support and deliver your interpretive and educational goals under the banner of your mission.

PPT available on slideshare here.

Share:

I led a couple of Career Cafe sessions at AAM which were meant to be resume writing workshops, but I decided to do something different. Initially, the attendees were a tad annoyed (another session that isn’t what it says its going to be) but in the end I think they appreciated it. I’m skeptical of boilerplate resume writing workshops because for me, a good resume is like the definition of pornography – I’ll know it when I see it.

I get to see a lot of resumes in the course of my job. And I mean a lot. Every posting we do gets around 200 submissions and its clear to me that the problem isn’t so much the resumes themselves, its that people don’t think about what’s going on in the institution and the fact that they’re entering a process. They appear to have this impression that it starts and ends with them writing a good resume. It doesn’t and when the hiring manager opens your resume, there isn’t a heavenly chorus, the business of the museum does not temporarily halt while your literary work of art is reviewed and the hiring manager does not immediately reach for the phone to secure your employment.

For my session, I talked about the process: The Position, the Posting, the Resumes, the Short List, the Phone Call, the Interview, the Offer and particularly the thing that everyone has trouble with – salary negotiation.

But before all that I talked about career and salary gradients. The truth is that nobody else is concerned about your career except you. There aren’t many people for whom this is not true. To progress requires action on your part and you will likely have a steeper career and a steeper salary gradient if you change institutions rather than staying at the same one for your entire career. This is because institutions are normally constrained to policy and guidelines for internal staff promotions and promotional increases, not so when hiring from outside.

A couple of thoughts surrounding getting promoted. Any job has what I like to think of as height and width. If your boss gives you more of the same work, that makes your job wider and that is not a reason to get promoted. However if he gives you work that requires more independent decision-making, more authority and responsibility, like supervising someone, that makes your job taller and is an opportunity for promotion, but there are some caveats: the majority of your job is taller; there is a valid reason why your department needs a higher level function, there is budget to support it. Sadly, doing the same job for 10 years is not a reason to get promoted, because essentially you are doing the same job. It all boils down to communication, ask your boss what you need to do to get a promotion. If you don’t ask, you’ll never know and if you don’t like the answer, time to move on or suck it up.

So, resumes. Your resume is metadata about you, it should be a work in progress, update it yearly to adjust some dates or add significant accomplishments – do it when you have a performance review or on your hire date. Keep it short, 1 page if possible, 2 max, unless your job requires a C.V, e.g. a list of publications, exhibitions, etc. Think of your resume as a reference tool for your next employer – simple to use and easy to understand. Its about you, so it should start with your name and a summary that captures the essence that you want to convey.

In the workshop we had a discussion about whether or not to start with an objective or summary. I’m in favour. If your resume starts with your education, the first thing I read about you is information than might be 10 or 15 years old – that’s not a good place to start. Starting with a summary or objective frames the rest of the resume, this is particularly important if you’re trying to switch careers, or you’re going for a job that doesn’t immediately follow from your skill and experience.

I encourage people to read Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink, which is an excellent book but could just as easily have been published as a pamphlet, or possibly even a quote. It essentially says, people make a judgement within a few seconds and once that judgement is made, its hard to ignore. Resumes are the same, the very first thing on the resume and the very first sentence in each job description, sets the expectation for what follows. And nothing frames a resume like a cover letter which is a one page narrative about you and why I should be interested in you. Some advice, be very careful using humour – if in doubt, leave it out.

Verbs are crucial in a resume and they should match the job posting. Here’s a trick: underline the verbs in the job posting that you’re applying for and then underline the verbs in your resume. For example, if the posting says lead, manage, direct, create, develop and assign, the verbs in your resume should be similar – worked with, liaised with, helped with, oversaw are not the same. They are very defensive phrases and immediately set an expectation of your (lack of) skill and experience.

So what’s all this nonsense about process that I wanted to talk about? The process starts with the posting and a fair amount of time has likely been spent expertly crafting it – all the information is in there, so read it carefully and read between the lines. Does “sense of humour” mean a wacky boss like David Brent, a stressful job or barely acceptable working conditions? Obviously, it could mean we’re a fun-loving group of people, but you never know.

As a hiring manager, I deal in resume bulk. When you apply for a job, you’re one in a few hundred, your goal is to be that one. The first step in my process is to generate a short list, which means elimination. I’m not looking for that great resume, I’m looking for reasons to remove you from the pile. Approximately one quarter of resumes can be eliminated due to typos and mistakes. Triple check your resume and cover letter and then get someone to read it, carefully. If the job you’re applying for requires an attention to detail and you haven’t attended to the detail, you’re not right for this job. Another quarter are usually insufficiently qualified or lack appropriate experience – college graduates applying for a job requiring 5 years’ experience. I can normally cut a resume list in half without even reading your resume, just your cover letter.

If you get to the interview, you’re goal is to make the interviewer “see you” in the job. According to Malcolm Gladwell, the interviewer has likely made a decision before you’ve even sat down. Consider the interview process. If you have a number of interviews with different people, your goal is to ensure that they physically have something about you, because when they have interviewed the short list of candidates they will meet to discuss and compare notes. No notes, no you, no job. Give them a takeaway, something more than your resume. Nothing does it like a personal note to go in your file – maybe buy it from the museum store. Remember that interviewing with an HR person will be totally different than interviewing with a curator or educator. One does it professionally, the other is an amateur and does it as infrequently as possible and is probably as nervous as you.

I did two workshops and both times we got into a discussion about gender. I can fairly accurately distinguish between male and female resumes and cover letters. It won’t surprise you to learn that male’s are shorter, direct and make more sweeping statements about their experience, they use bold verbs to describe their activities, this makes them appear more authoritative as candidates. Female’s are more descriptive and there’s more of an effort to accurately describe their roles in different jobs. This can come across as defensive.

There is definitely a difference in how males and females approach salary negotiations. Males enter the negotiation to win, females enter to come to an agreement – its a subtle but meaningful difference. Again, think about the process and who’s making you the offer. Is the professional making the offer or the amateur? Don’t be afraid to negotiate, but have an explanation about why you’re asking for a particular amount – kids and mortgage don’t work, they are not my problem. Once a group of people have made a decision and you are the top candidate, no one wants to settle for second best. If you can’t negotiate on salary, try other things, pay review after six months, vest after 1 year, relocation expenses, signing bonus, &c.

Moving job should be an improvement, a step forward either financially, in quality of life or experience.

As a final thought, we live in uncertain times, and I’ve been “encouraged to move on” twice, once with extreme prejudice. After the seven stages of grief, both were excellent opportunities for me to advance. If you’re in that situation, its what you make of it.

As usual, I found a quote:

Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. – Thomas A. Edison

Here’s the handout from my workshop.

Share:

From the “You’ve Got To Be Kidding, This is 2010, Isn’t It?” department:

“A comic book adaptation of James Joyce’s notoriously challenging epic Ulysses is now available on the App Store, but only after Apple demanded cuts.

Rob Berry and Josh Levitas launched the ambitious webcomic version of the classic novel, one of the most important works of Modernist literature, earlier this year under the title Ulysses Seen. The comic includes only cartoon nudity, which the pair had to remove before Apple would approve the app.

“Apple has strict guidelines and a rating system to prevent ‘adult content.’ Their highest mature content rating is 17+, which doesn’t seem to be a problem since no one reads Ulysses at sixteen anyway. But their guidelines also mean no nudity whatsoever. Which is something we never planned for” …

“While the first chapter of the book, the one now at iTunes, doesn’t contain ‘offensive language,‘ our comic does have frank nudity. Something we figured we might have to pixelate or cover with ‘fig leaves,’” Berry notes. “But Apple’s policy prohibits even that. So we were forced to either scrap the idea of moving to the tablet with Apple or re-design our pages.”

Further comment probably superfluous.

Share:

Just back from AAM and since the conference was slam bang in the middle of the American Idol extravaganza, I wanted to nominate a few of my own American Idols.

Huzzah for the Digital Jump-Start Unconference Co-chaired by Sharon Leon and Michael Edson

Kudos and a special champagne toast to the entire Media & Technology Board, and the many volunteer judges and jury members for a tremendous jump-start to the conference last Sunday evening with the MUSE Awards, and continued to power-house through the week with tutorials, an online conference, and the most successful M&T lunch ever.

And speaking of the MUSE Awards–congratulations to the 2010 MUSE Award Winners.

Special shout out to the winners in the new (and newly named) Honeysett-Din Student Award (to be known henceforth as the HD Student Award).

Three cheers for Herminia Din and Nik Honeysett, both of whom, retired from the Media & Technology Board this year.  They were rewarded for their tireless efforts with action figures made in their own likeness and the new award named in their honor.  Fantastic idea JackDaddy Ludden, new M&T Board Chair,  and all of team M&T.

Raise the roof for Douglas Hegley, Jack Ludden, and Rob Stein who gave fantastic presentations and presented themselves as the very models of modern i.t. professionals–thoughtful, challenging, intelligent, and witty–in the Demystifying the Mighty I.T. session yesterday.

Another round of applause for new AAM Board of Director Nik Honeysett who took over the responsibility for museum’s role in the Joint National Committee for Archives Libraries and Museums (CALM) and, without his hands ever leaving his arms, gave a stellar and useful presentation on mid-career resume building (get that pdf and presentation online soon Nik!)

These are just a few of the American (Association of Museums) Idols — no voting any of them off, ever–they are too, too talented a group of people.

Share:

At 8 am this morning, in the middle of Olympic Avenue, in Los Angeles, on my way to chair a session at AAM, I fell.

I think this is a story about unemployment.

I’m not really unemployed, I’m underemployed.  I teach, I do contract work and I truly enjoy what I do.  I’ve been very happy lately and thought, until this morning, that I had gotten over the devastation of having my full-time position eliminated last August.

And then, this morning, I fell on Olympic Avenue.

I wasn’t badly hurt.  I quickly picked myself up, and brushed myself off.  Looking down I realized I couldn’t go on to the convention center without doing a little triage.   I turned around to walk back to the hotel and wash the blood off my knees.  As I turned around I lost it.  In less then 30 seconds I went from a confident professional, to the person I was last August, sitting at a table and listening to someone inform me that both my job and my department were about to be eliminated.

As I trudged back to the hotel I had a conversation with myself that I probably should have had last August.  I wailed (not verbally, this was virtual wailing) and gnashed my teeth.  I argued with the universe about my worth and made the case for Holly Witchey.  At the end of the whole painful process a light bulb went on above my head.  The physical accident had allowed me to mentally pick myself up and brush myself off from an intellectual tumble I’d taken 10 months earlier.

You know what?

I could not be happier that this morning, in the middle of Olympic Avenue, I fell.

Share:

If you’re coming to LA for AAM you’ll be able to see the real thing but in a shameless plug, I had to share the next best thing. We’re opening a redesigned gallery featuring Medieval and Renaissance Sculpture and Decorative Arts.

Click here to see the re-designed gallery.

A focal piece of the sculpture and decorative arts galleries is an extraordinary collector’s cabinet from Augsburg, Germany, which represents the 17th-century desire to gather and order knowledge. Cabinets such as this, along with items of natural, artistic, and intellectual interest originally kept within, are essentially forerunners of today’s museums.

Although it isn’t known what was kept in this cabinet, its many surfaces are richly decorated. This interactive presentation—also available in the gallery near the cabinet itself—enables you to discover the piece’s many surprises.

Click here to interactive with the cabinet.

But that’s not the coolest thing. The coolest thing would be this:

Instructions can be found here.

Shameless plug, I know. Sorry.

Share:

Kim the Kitten reads an executive summary of her report about museums entitled “We love museums…Do Museums Love Us Back?”

Don’t go to AAM until you’ve watched it.  In fact, don’t go back to work tomorrow morning until you’ve watched it.

Share:

Within change lies great opportunity, but what happens when individual change is incremental and the rest of the world is exponential? Our cultural institutions are in the slow lane, still, and they are being threatened because of it.

I was reminded of that threat very keenly today, after I saw this article from Read Write Web: Google Adds Semantic Search Results with Google Squared.

According to the company’s blog from one year ago today, when Google Squared first launched, “unlike a normal search engine, Google Squared doesn’t find webpages about your topic — instead, it automatically fetches and organizes facts from across the Internet.”

…

By clicking “show sources” on the Squared-provided result, a list of sources appears showing you how Google is arriving at this answer.

…

Much of this information, however, relies either on Google’s ability to naturally parse information or for web publishers to begin “adopting microformats or RDFa standards to mark up their HTML and bring this structured data to the surface”, as the company wrote at launch last year.

This is really quite fantastic for information-seekers. We’ve been heading this way for a while, and I’m happy to see this rolled out on this scale. For most users, they won’t even notice it, but for those of us whose business it is to provide content, what does it mean for us?

First, it means is that we’ve really got to get our collective acts together. When I was writing my master’s thesis four years ago, I posited that soon we would have our collections online and we would be able to move on from public access and onto public interpretation. Unfortunately, my timeline was wrong and many institutions are still at square one.

Looking collectively at the field, there are hundreds (or thousands) of collections, large and small, who still do not have collection information management systems, digital asset management systems, content management systems, SEO optimization, metadata standards, embedded metadata, or a combination of all of the above.  Why is this? Well, for the most part, museums, libraries, and archives are notoriously bad at adopting complex technologies unless significant pressure is applied either internally or externally. And when they do recognize the need, the persons responsible for advocating for adoption find themselves stuck trying to explain something intangible to a board of directors who are more interested in on-site programming and foot traffic. It is incredibly difficult at this time to show hard statistics about SEO increasing foot traffic or even online learning.

For example, here’s my institution, the Magnes’, most well-known work:

Lavater and Lessing Visit Moses Mendelssohn (1856) by Moritz Daniel Oppenheim - Magnes Collection

I just performed a search for this piece, using a couple of different search terms. The first result in both image and web search (Google) was the page in Flickr. Second hit was to Wikipedia and then Wikimedia Commons. For the last two, the image had been scanned from a German text Magnes had licensed the image to. There was no link to Magnes, nor anything that suggested that the piece was in our collection. There were zero hits to our website or to our collections online (in my own defense, we’re overhauling our website for precisely this reason, embedding metadata into the images, and I have no control over database SEO right now!).

This isn’t limited to small, underfunded history museums. If you perform a web search for “starry night van gogh”, MoMA is the third hit. Not too bad, actually. But if you perform an image search, Van Gogh’s “Starry Night” is displayed prominently, but you won’t find MoMA as a source until the bottom of the second page.

Ok. So clearly we all need to do some work with optimizing both our sites and our images. However, those things are really hard for most museums. If I could wave a magic wand, there would be a product that does all of the following (vendors, are you listening? Take notes. DO THIS. We will give you our money!):

• Manages museum, library and archive information in one, federated database, including exhibitions, conservation, provenance, rights, location tracking, etc.
• Exports and imports into a variety of crosswalked metadata standards
• Utilizes controlled vocabularies and standards in order to facilitate pan-institutional linkages
• Serves as a robust digital asset management system, embedding the collection data into EXIF/IPTC/XML fields of the master asset and makes derivatives at will
• Displays collection assets online in a clean, flexible, attractive manner, utilizing sharing and embedding features, optimizing keywords and tagging, and having an available API for online visitors to use

The frustrating thing for me is that I’ve seen a lot of systems that do most of this, but not all of them. Institutions who can do this use a variety of systems, bandaged together with bits of programming. Granted, I’m not a programmer, but I know such a system is possible. I’ve seen bits of it work together, but none all at once. Lacking such a system means that institutions can’t fully prepare their assets for the semantic web.

Archives and libraries are likely a bit better off, as they’ve applied easily-computer-readable XML standards to their already happily formatted data. But I have to wonder if the model for siloing data will be a benefit or a curse in the long run. Will these silos be flexible enough to engage with online users expecting to find information with only one or two search terms, in only one location? This leads me to my next point…

Second, we need to take a hard look at how we’re actively sharing our data and with whom. Search engines are not going to find all of our stuff, from us, if we release the assets online without some methods of bringing the user back to home base. Like the Oppenheim painting above, users finding assets online won’t know where its from, and thus, probably, won’t have the benefit of any additional research about the original works. Our authority is threatened because of this. Our ace in the hole is that we have the authentic object, but what happens if no one knows where the authentic object is?

I’m not at all suggesting that we limit our release of assets, but I am recommending that we slow down a moment and take stock. “Just get them online” isn’t good enough. It’s never really been good enough, only a start. Online assets mean very little if they lose their context. A digital file of a painting may be pretty, but without the information we can provide, its only function is ornamental.

The way we use the web is changing. The way the search engines are using the web is changing. We need to respond more quickly to changing search algorithms and use patterns, and we need to try to figure out some easier solutions for linking our data to the rest of the web. A cohesive, easy-to-use product would be a good start. We’re also siloed within our own institutions and consortiums, making connections with our friends while forgetting that we’re also part of the larger world. I fear for those of us who don’t get a handle on these problems soon; if we fail to do so, our role as respected educational resources becomes diminished, if only from lack of exposure.

Share:

I don’t even have the merest sliver of an actual link to new technologies in this blog post.  I believe inherently in the value of a meritocracy and I think that the woman who writes the weekly webzine Luxirare has outdone herself with this avocado/crab recipe. And if you like that here’s a link to the food archive.  A shout-out here to Veggie Bouillon who sent me the link to the recipe via facebook.

The “fake Karl Lagerfeld” doesn’t like the webzine, says it’s “too pretentious” and “…and she features aggressive photos of singularly nauseating food.”

Maybe there is a link to power of new technologies in this somewhere.  Who knew there with enough hours in the day not only to create this food but photograph it and upload the pictures with descriptions and helpful tips.

And who could ever have imagined the opportunities for virtual-celebrity-role-playing bloggers just a few short years ago.

I was contemplating a fake Boudicca blog but won’t feel entirely secure doing this until I get the mandatory big gold necklace that Dio Cassius describes.  I wonder if Luxirare or Fake Karl Lagerfield can help me find something suitable?

Share:

A conference is a gathering of important people who singly can do nothing, but together can decide that nothing can be done.

- Fred Allen

(You’re impressed I have a quote about conferences, huh?)

And so it goes as we approach another AAM conference, this year hosted in my home town. I was trying to decide if this was a good thing or a bad thing. Traditionally I have blatantly flouted any session preparation deadlines, preferring instead to use the flight for some much needed me-time in gathering my thoughts for any presentations. Not so this year, which is why I’m not presenting on any sessions. No flight? No Presenting? That’s my New Rule.

OK, technically that’s a lie, I’m doing a couple of Career Cafes, and now that I’m self-important, I have lots of meetings. Oh and there’s one other thing…

So if a conference is a group of people who can do nothing, what we need is an Un-Conference so that we can do something. Well, guess what?

<shameless_pitch interest=”self”>

On Sunday, May 23, 2:45pm – 5:30pm there is a session Jump Start Digital Work in Your Institution: An Interactive Planning Session. Its a double session that pairs participants with teams of Web and New Media experts to work through issues of starting and completing real-world technology projects and Web 2.0 initiatives. Attendees can get help with current digital projects and potential future ideas.

</shameless-pitch>

In the same way that movie stars only need referring to by their first name (Denzel, Sly, Arnie, &c), you’ll be able to get some face time with the giants of the museum technology world with the likes of Bruce, Nancy, Rich, Herminia, Mike… (OK, this is where my metaphor breaks down…)

In the same way that movie stars only need referring to by their second name (Crowe, Hanks, Streep, &c), you’ll be able to get some face time with the giants of the museum technology world with the likes of Edson, Gordy, Iannacone, Leventhal, Mouw, Portway, Sarraf, Sasaki, Sparrow, Spiess.

Its the museum technology equivalent of the upcoming movie The Expendables. (OK, bad choice of title, but you get my point, everybody will be there).

The two main inspirations for the un-conference are:

• To overcome the challenge of AAM session proposals being due 10 months before the conference start date.
• To get as much face time between conference attendees and experienced practitioners as possible.

The un-conference home page is digital-jumpstart.org

See the current list of facilitators here, but its growing.

The event is using the #djump hashtag and of course the #aam2010 tag as well.

Technology has its up and downs and sometimes we all need a shoulder to cry on. Technology is no exception and I’ve wept technology tears many times. But there’s one way to avoid technology-tears-before-bedtime, come and see the Expendables Clash of the Museum Technology Titans.

OK, too many movie references, but you are coming to Hollywood, Hooray!

Sunday, May 23, 2:45pm – 5:30pm, Jump Start Digital Work in Your Institution: An Interactive Planning Session

Share:

From the folks at IBM that brought you the Many Eyes visualization service,   a new tool called Many Bills (as in U.S. Government legislation)  is now available.

Curious about bills having to do with museums?   libraries? archives?

Share:

It’s been a long, long time since I’ve had much to do with students in art school.  However, due to a fortunate series of events (involving a get-away weekend with my husband to a farm bed and breakfast in Niagara-on-the-lake) I’ve become acquainted with three talented young women.  Blogs about Carrie and “Veggie Boullion” are still to be written but here is a lovely article about the Brock University 2010 Visual Arts Honours Exhibition “Said the Attic” on view now if you are in the Niagara Region.  The article highlights the work of the third young woman in our Canadian Art Triumvirate: Alica Kuntze, who along with fellow student Mike Diriso created Out of Touch,  a painting that can only be ‘seen’ by reaching into a wooden crate and touching the painting.  Congratulations Alicia!

Share:

On Monday, May 24, 9:00 – 10:15 a.m. there will be panel discussion at AAM on the Future of Museums, Libraries, and Archives. In the summer of 2008 The National Academy of Sciences, supported by IMLS, convened “The Future of Libraries and Museums in the 21st Century Planning.”  This meeting brought together voices from museums and libraries to debate, discuss, and question the future. The result of the meeting was a 30 page discussion guide on a far-ranging list of topics including: Changing Definitions and Roles, Shifts in Power and Authority, Technology & Policy Development, and The 21st Century Museum and Library Workforce.   This panel discussion will include participants from the museum, archive, and libraries communities who, along with the audience, will address the discussion guide topics.  If you are interested in these topics IMLS is in the middle of a special wiki project discussing the various topics: UpNext.  Join the conversation.

Who is the audience for this panel? You we hope! If you consider yourself  as one a a growing number of museum professionals who work multi-functional institutions (institutions that combine elements of archives, libraries and museums).  This session is designed as a discussion to create a dialogue between the traditional museum employee—out of a curatorial or a museum studies program—and the growing number of professionals working at museums who have hold Masters degrees in Library and Information Science.  It is also designed to appeal to a more general audience, working in both large and small institutions, concern with issues raised in the discussion guide.

What we are hoping to accomplish:The desired outcome for this panel is the commencement of a national discussion on the topic of the future of museums, libraries, and archives.  The nine discussion topics cover areas of broad concern that cross all three fields and represent issues—such as the development of a 21st century work force—that cannot simply be left to chance.  The session also will ask delegates to consider ways to continue to keep the conversation going post meeting and, ultimately, a format for communicating the results of the sessions to be held at all three annual meetings (ALA, SAA, AAM) to be widely circulated.

The session is sponsored by the Joint National Committee for Archives, Libraries, and Museums (CALM) — which though a part of  AAM’s dropdown menu for sponsoring organizations doesn’t seem to bring up either this session of the CALM Committee Meeting which is open to all delegates later Monday afternoon.  More on that ANON.

Share:

I enjoy going to the Annual Meeting of the American Association of Museums (AAM).  There are interesting sessions, lots of networking opportunities, reunions with friends (old and new) and this year there is one more cause for celebration in Los Angeles. Nik Honeysett, Head of Administration at J. Paul Getty Museum, has been named to the Board of Directors of AAM.

In terms of full disclosure, Nik and I go way back, I’ve known him since he was a singularly gifted programmer at Cognitive Applications in the mid-1990s. It has been a pleasure to watch his steadily meteoric career after his shift from the vendor world to museums in 2000. Nik’s appointment is a terrific thing for museums, not just for technologists–although admittedly it is great to finally have someone at the board level at AAM who came up through the ranks.  It is fantastic to have someone, like Nik, who understands and has an impressive track record in the strategic implementation of new technologies.

Nik knows how important success is and he knows that failure can sometimes be the best teacher.  He is clear-sighted and he does the right thing.  He raises the bar and invites and inspires others to do their best.

I didn’t start out to write an encomium on Nik Honeysett, okay, maybe I did.  As a friend and colleague I am proud of his success and proud of my professional organization for having the good sense to appoint him to the Board of Directors.

Get the champagne chilled in Los Angeles there is cause for celebration.

Congratulations Nik.

Share:

From the blog Proper Discord  Don’t forget viscountess. And you think you have problems?

Share: