Ross Dawson on the future of museums

[Seb Chan]

'Future of Media' analyst and enterprise strategist Ross Dawson participated in a 'Future Directions' forum at the Powerhouse today and he has blogged his notes and ideas over on his blog. (The Future Directions forum is a series of meetings this week and next at the Museum at which invited guests discuss possible future directions for the Powerhouse which is now 20 years old - in its current location)

http://rossdawsonblog.com/weblog/archives/2008/05/thinking_about.html

Everyone is discussing the future of museums right now and the voices that come from outside the sector are quite possibly the most important to listen to.

Ross picks up on the idea that museums are essentially 'media' - albeit slow media. I've been running with this idea for a while and in the digital space the strategies that museums need to be closely examining are those being successfully implemented by media organisations like the BBC, The Guardian, New York Times, Fairfax, News Limited etc. In the digital space these are our global competitors for attention and increasingly, as they open their archives and move their investigative and scientific journalism online, are encroaching on 'traditional' museum space.

[Angelina Russo]

Hi Seb
Thanks for posting this. It would have been great to attend. In my response to Ross's article I suggested that despite the good work which occurs by shining lights such as you and Lynda, the museum sector seems to struggles with ideologies it seems to have created DESPITE the excellent research and development that has occured over the past 40 years! I'd be interested in your thoughts!

[Mal Booth]

Yes, and this all supports my argument that museums need to start digitising their own stuff now. "Opening our own archives, digitally", to borrow from the final para above.

[Mal Booth]

I've now read Ross Dawson's post in full and agree that there are some useful, though not totally surprising points in it. I don't fully agree with Angelina's more detailed response on his blog.
I agree that we need to start using new media technologies, both online and in our museums, but that isn't and cannot be our total focus. Museums, galleries, libraries and archives (with traditional collections) will always be places that people want to visit and view and read and experience things that they cannot do online. Sure, new technologies can make our galleries more engaging and deliver rich experiences to our users, but until recently, such technologies have not proved very reliable or robust enough for either long term displays or travelling shows. If you ever visit the Memorial's newer galleries, you'll get some understanding that we do know what we are talking about with the use of media in museums. We have a whole sub-section set up here that helps develop and keep such media running and it is almost a full time concern.
Now, to turn to the online stuff. I also agree that we have something to learn from the news media in opening up our archives and facilitating more participation in the online environment. But and it is a big but, we can never really hope to compete with the huge media empires, it simply isn't feasible. We are not Newscorp, Disneyland, Nickelodeon or Fairfax. They might be useful models for us to mimic on a much smaller scale, but we don't have a stack of jounalists sitting around waiting to engage in online conversations. Nor do we have the media expertise and savvy of the BBC or the ABC.
In reality, most museums are pretty stretched just developing and caring for their collections, researching and describing them adequately, providing access to them and curating exhibitions that might interest the public. As I said at the MA Futures Forum, I still believe that the public (who pay for most of our running costs) expect those basic functions from us. They don't like quick and dirty displays, they expect us to get it right and as a colleague of mine here often says "there is no such thing as a small exhibition".
Some museums are also pretty busy developing rich online content by digitising selected parts of their collections for online access or preservation purposes (or both in some cases). That too isn't a simple or quick process that can be done easily and on a whim, without any challenges. In many cases, what the public wants to see simply cannot be digitised within the current legislative rules. In some museums, digitisation priorities are centred on preserving heritage items that can only be saved by creating digital surrogates, so access isn't a prime consideration. Copyright and other restrictions from owners and makers complicate things even further. Nevertheless, some of us have made a start and I think you can now view for free about 2.2 million single items from our collection (documents, images, art works, sound files, films, publications, etc.) via our website.
Good work is being done by museums other than the Powerhouse and AusMus (no offence meant to them). People just need to get out a bit more to see it, and by "out more" I also mean on the web.
One other little appreciated factor here is preparation for the digital future and I am aware of few comprehensive examples of museums taking steps to really get ready internally with a sound base for such a future. The Memorial is. We already have a very large digital collection and it is growing at a rapid rate, both in terms of numbers and the total size of the repository. Advances in digital technology have facilitated an increased rate of production. These assets need to be managed for the future and also easily provided to (and found on) our website for public access purposes. So, we've started implementing an ambitious Enterprise Content Management System that will integrate management of our digital assets with a web content management sys

[Angelina Russo]

Hi Ross
I do agree that many museums, libraries and galleries are developing excellent online tools for their visitors. This can be considered one of a myriad of ways in which visitors interact with the organisation. The post was developed off the back of the Futures Forum which brought up a number of legacy issues. It is also in response to the everpresent notion that communication can be a secondary aspect of the museum's program. This is a view which comes up time and again at conferences, in publications etc.
I do believe that the organisation's mission needs to drive the development of communication strategies. If outreach is important, then online tools are an excellent, cost effective and potentially audience-creating way to achieve this. I'll be interested to here about the Entrerprise Content Management System - sounds like a great initiative.

[Lynda Kelly]

Mal, I'd be the first to admit that the Australian Museum is pretty far behind in the online world at the moment. We currently have a website that cannot be changed except without a huge effort and a collection that is being slowly digitised among the huge other changes that are happening with buildings, moves etc. I think where we are ahead is in thinking about the issues, doing audience research and trying to engage staff in an organisational change process - that's where I see the challenge will lie for organisations in the future along with sustainability and implementing robust systems - as we know "in order to create chaos we must first have order"!

When I came back from M&W2008 I was quite concerned at how far behind I think we are slipping in Australia if we don't get our act together, and these were hightened after the Futures Forum. There are so many wonderful initiatives happening out there and I agree that people need to get out and have a look. The Best of the Web Awards from M&W conferences are a great start.

The one thing I loved about your provocative paper at the Futures Forum was the idea that just as we tour physical exhibitions we need to tour the web. I've certainly taken that on board and am just getting on with it in my own way (also taking advice from Nina's blog post on Museum Skunkworks!).