I’ve been trying to figure out the best way to describe my experience at my first MCN conference.  I could say that the description in the conference program for the session on Semantic Web started out with “What is the Semantic Web and why should you care?” and that I can now answer both of those questions.  I could write about how much I learned about Digital Asset Management systems and why outsourcing isn’t currently a viable option, but might be someday as a result of conversations held in a basement room of the Grand Hyatt.  But to be honest, I think the most important thing I took away from the conference (other than this great Grand Hyatt ball point pen) has a lot less to do with computers and a lot more to do with people. 

Any time you have museum people talking about their collections, the word “control” comes up a lot.  It came up in one of the sessions as we discussed the loss of control of items placed on the web, it came up during the conversation on outsourcing, and it of course came up in the session on data standardization.  Why is it that museums haven’t yet reached the high level of standardization of libraries?  Control.  Tell a curator that has been at an institution for 25 years that she now has to describe all of the works in the collection according to someone else’s system, and see how far you get.  “Letting go” isn’t something museum people seem to be very good at doing. 

But there are very good reasons to sometimes let something go; to relinquish some control.  In the session on DAMS outsourcing, Ari Davidow really struck a chord with me when he was discussing the need for outsourcing.  There are IT experts out there; why should museum staff try to replicate that?  If you’re a curator, curate.  If you are a smaller museum, focus on what it is you set out to do – programming, exhibitions, outreach, whatever it is – and leave IT to the experts.  And to do that, you have to change your perception of a loss of control to a gain of insight. 

I think that’s one of the biggest challenges for people like me – collections managers, database administrators, registrars – whatever the title, the task is the same.  You have to find a way to take what you know about current technology, what you know about collections, and what you know about the people using those collections and merge them together with what other people on staff may have to contribute.  The presenters for the Data Standardization Projects session illustrated this as they discussed their methods for getting museum curators to go along with extensive standardization projects.  By working closely with the curators and letting them be part of the planning phase of the project, they were able to successfully standardize huge portions of their data.  The process was explained to the curators and they were able to see the need for the project; instead of feeling forced into a system they didn’t want, they were able to make it their own system, balancing out the need for standardization as well as the ability to retain some control over their own work. 

This example shows that a technology initiative has to be cooperative to be successful, and museum staff have to be able to trust the expertise of their colleagues.  With our tight budgets, small work forces, and ambitious drives to do increasingly impressive projects, we need to be able to make the most of the skills we have, and be honest enough with ourselves to acknowledge that sometimes there’s a better solution, even if it’s not our own. 

Thanks for the opportunity to join the MCN conference – and hope to see you next year.

- Amber Morgan, Associate Registrar
Andy Warhol Museum, Pittsburg, PA

The MCN Conference: A Newbie’s Perspective

I was one of five lucky scholarship recipients to attend the MCN annual conference in Washington, DC. As a first time attendee to the conference I was nervous that the information would be way over my head. What struck me first about the conference was the range of professions represented by attendees. I expected to meet mostly IT, IS or other technology only experts but I was pleasantly surprised to see registrars and collections managers along with other museum professionals. I often have felt alone tackling and integrating emerging technologies into my museum’s daily functions but I now know others who share my fascination and excitement about the role for computer technology in museums.
The morning showcases were invaluable in learning how other organizations are using technology to network cultural information, broaden the presence of small organizations and promote collections activities. I now have innovative ideas to share with the staff and faculty at my institution. I see new ways dissimilar organizations can pair together using technology to achieve common goals.
I was grateful to hear about the ambitious projects completed by MCN members. Among them were community partnerships, university outreach and student designed projects. As a university employee, I am inspired by these projects and hope to discover new ways my museum can work with students and the community via technology to enhance our role as a resource in our area.
As a first time attendee of the conference I was excited to explore new ideas for my museum and to meet others who share my goals, problems and desire for creative and technological resolutions. I would like to thank the MCN board and membership for supporting scholarships for the conference. Without the scholarship I could not benefit from the fabulous resources I encountered in DC.

–Kyle Bryner, Museum Registrar and Collections Manager
Museum of Anthropology at Wake Forest University, Winston Salem, NC

Donald Urquhart
Director of Collections Management
Portland Art Museum

Last week, I attended my first MCN conference. On the first day, I became keenly aware that everyone around me had already drunk the techno Kool-Aid. The presenters and the participants all seemed convinced that technology is essential to the fulfillment of our respective missions. It was strangely comforting to commiserate about legacy systems and non-standard data. And it was encouraging to hear colleagues extolling the virtues of DAMs, Dashboards, and UPDIG, but I surprised myself by sometimes missing that other voice – the voice that defines actual reality in museums by the very personal interaction between the visitor and the object, unaffected by outside influence or distraction.

This feeling culminated on the last day of the conference, during the presentation of the Horizon Report. There, Susan Chun led an excellent dialogue about the future of technology in museums. Audience participation was great as the group discussed ways that emerging technologies will impact museum professionals in every aspect of our work. Topics ranged from open content to geolocation, but the subject that received the most attention was Alternative Interaction Devices. It was then that I longed for the traditional curatorial perspective.

In actual reality, there’s much we can do to enhance a visitor’s experience. We might begin by choosing a sympathetic wall color and investing in full-spectrum lighting. We almost certainly will add a label with basic tombstone information, and perhaps a didactic panel to convey an idea. It’s common now to further enhance the experience by adding an audio guide or podcast. Is there room, then for more devices? What happens if we add interactive iPhones, tangible object interfaces, and multi-touch environments? With these add-ons, I wonder if we run the risk of passing the point of diminishing returns – of deluding the experience instead of enhancing it.

Happily, some Alternative Interactions Devices exist which promise to strip away the add-ons. RFIDs and specialized sensors that track a movement, gaze, or gesture could enhance that moment in the gallery by personalizing the experience with minimal intervention. In the future, a painting could recognize me, then customize the information it conveys. It might sense my native language, education level, and art historical preferences. It might relate itself to the last work I visited, and then suggest the next. Or, if I preferred, it could say nothing. It could let me do all the work, without a label or didactic panel; without a download, or a kiosk, or a touch screen.

The beauty of such innovations is that they allow museums to meet a visitor on his or her terms. They leverage technology in ways that appeal to purists and technophiles, all in the fulfillment of the mission. This future may be a long way off, but it excites me, and I look forward to being a part of it.

David Farrell, Collections Co-ordinator
Peel Heritage Complex
Brampton, ON  

Unlike the other recipients of the 2008 MCN scholarship, I am not new to the museum and technology field. In fact, as for the museum part anyhow, I am defiantly long in the tooth, having been involved with museums for more than a quarter of a century. The technology part came later when in the early to mid 1990’s I became self-taught in Access 2 in order to build a collections management system for a community museum in British Columbia.

I do, however, work in a small community museum/art gallery/archives in a suburb of Toronto and the scholarship allowed me to attend an MCN conference after an absence of two years. As with MCN Boston in 2005, the last conference that I attended, I moderated a session concerned with technology in small museums, very appropriate for the chair of MCN’s Small Museum SIG. This year the session was Technologies in Small Museums: Common Problems/Innovative Solutions and the two presenters who were able to attend were Melissa Kinkley from the Smart Museum of Art at the University of Chicago, and Aurelie Henry from the National Postal Museum, a Smithsonian Museum. They both detailed projects at their respective institutions which illustrated strategies for introducing new technologies in small or medium museums. Melissa also gave the presentation on distributing content using affordable technologies prepared by Chris Alexander of the San Jose Museum of Art. Chris’ position was cut to part-time just before the conference and was therefore unable to come to the conference in person.

I also took part in Wednesday’s DAM workshop, attended all the Case Study Showcases and other session and chaired the Small Museum SIG meeting. My primary objective, as is usual when I attend a MCN conference, was to search for as much information as possible that would be applicable to my own institution. Also typical, I found that as the conference progressed, an unintended theme seemed to develop from everything I heard and saw; new technologies may be impressive in and of themselves, but if adopting them doesn’t spring from your Strategic Plan and if they don’t support your institution’s mission, then it won’t be worthwhile and your museum won’t be any further ahead. This came up even in the discussion that ensued after the Small Museum Session that I moderated.
It was also great to touch base with colleagues I had not seen in a couple of years and to meet some for the first time. A surprising number of them were fellow Canadians since CHIN was once again well represented. Hopefully I will be able to attend another MCN conference in the near future.

Erin Noseworthy, Manager of Multimedia Interpretive Programs
Hunter Museum of American Art
Chattanooga, TN

Emerging Leaders in Small Museums 

There were many good sessions at MCN this year about everything from imaging to the semantic web. Although I found each of the sessions I attended interesting, much of the information seemed out of the grasp of my “mid-size” institution. However, a session entitled Technologies in Small Museums: Common Problems/Innovative Solutions helped put things in perspective with an edge of empowerment. Not only were the presenting institutions facing nearly identical issues, but the presenters were emerging professional in the fields of technology and education, like myself. 

The two presenters, Melissa Holbert of the Smart Museum of Art and Aurelie Henry of the National Postal Museum, did not focus on the technologies used within their institutions or their projects per say, but rather on the processes and collaboration necessitated by technology initiatives in small museums. Even in small museums, interdepartmental communication can be a challenge. However, simple initiatives such as a technology committee, described by Holbert, can open new lines of communication and streamline work flow. Additionally, it is important to keep in mind that the museum’s staff is its richest resource; technology committees and project meetings help keep your staff in the loop and allow for a more diverse exchange of ideas and approaches. Henry’s iterative approach to the kiosk development at the National Postal Museum as well as her foresight to use the expertise of the museum’s staff as well as other resources at her disposal has empowered me to come at my institution’s current technology challenges and projects from a new angle and with a different perspective.

As a result of this session and one’s such as Exploiting the Web: Explore Museum’s Across Collections, I have added several additional lines to my “to do” list. I plan to repurpose and expand the focus of the Hunter’s current digitization committee to include the use of technology across the board. The new tech committee will be a venue for staff to discuss and explore the use of various technologies throughout the museum – on the floor, online, and in the office – as well as stay up-to-date on ongoing and new technology based projects. I intend to open the tech committee meeting up to all staff. From this larger committee more focused groups will be established, with the appropriate personnel, to address specific technology issues. One such group will focus on digitization, an initiative whose importance should only be made more obvious through the tech committee’s discussions. As one of my primary goals I returned to the museum’s digitization initiative, after MCN, with a new more critical eye, focused not only on simply getting the data out there, but also on the viability of that data. 

This post is from Dr. Florian Schweizer, Curator at the Charles Dickens Museum in London. http://www.dickens2012.org/

I travelled to the Museum Computer Network conference 2007 in Chicago with a view to hear about recent developments in and approaches to attracting new audiences. In addition to my duties as Curator of the Charles Dickens Museum in London, I had also recently been appointed as Project Coordinator for the global bicentennial celebrations around Charles Dickens’s birthday in 2012. This project is all about improving access to Dickens’s works for present and future generations.

The MCN conference was a great opportunity to get involved in the rapidly transforming world of user-content interaction. The range of topics discussed on the panels was extraordinary, inviting the audience to join discussions about diverse topics such as the difficulties of implementing simple software tools in small museums and the successes of introducing cutting-edge applications to a new generation of visitors.

I am pleased to report that the MCN conference has had a great impact on the way we will present the Dickens 2012 bicentenary on our new website. Previously, I had no clear view as to what contents and interfaces we ought to offer in the run up to the events in 2012. During the conference, however, I was inspired to design our new website as a portal for the community, incorporating designs, tools and applications that most users are familiar with. The new website, about to be published at the end of February, has been created to engage different audiences on an interactive platform. A social networking forum for anyone interested in Charles Dickens, this website offers authoritative services for a wide range of users: teachers who want their students to read Dickens, parents trying to get their children to read ‘classic’ narratives, enthusiasts who want to go to Dickens festivals as well as scholars wishing to discuss the latest ideas on his works. In order to cater for ‘future’ generations, we recruited a young team of web designers to create an environment that is not condescending but encouraging. We aim for a website that appeals to an audience more familiar with instant messaging than the slow experience reading of a novel such as Bleak House or David Copperfield.

At a different level the conference was very useful for me to appreciate some of the differences between the issues museum professionals encounter in the UK (and, to some extent, in other European countries) and the issues for professionals in other parts of the world. In particular, I was surprised to hear about the great divide between the curatorial and IT departments that seem to be an issue in many museums. I know that such divisions exist here as well, but certainly not to the extent that I have witnessed during the conference. I was fascinated by the presentations on the case studies and the award-winning applications that were presented throughout the conference.

Attending the conference has been extremely useful for me and my project, and I do hope that I have been able to implement some of the ideas into our new website (www.dickens2012.org) for the benefit of our users. I will definitely come back and, to use Dickens’s words, ‘ask for more’.

As a newcomer to the museum-technology field, I was impressed by MCN‘s long history, by its established networks and legacy of tackling relevant issues. That certainly seems to remain the case in 2007. I was drawn to the wide-ranging mix of sessions on web 2.0, on management of digital collections and computer-based content management, on copyright issues and more copyright issues. I was encouraged by the international perspectives and range of institution-sizes.

My organization, the National September 11 Memorial & Museum at the World Trade Center, is just now embarking on what we all hope will be a long institutional career. So many important start-up decisions for a museum seem to have to do with technology these days. Being called upon to aid in that decision-making process can seem a daunting task, but I believe that MCN will prove a useful resource as we move forward. Already we are discussing points raised by the Chicago conference. We are delving into long-range planning to make our web-site more accessible to the web-savvy and the not-so-savvy alike and ADA compatible in the process. We are also actively keeping in mind the numerous standards conversations that are going on right now in the field as we shape our collections/assets database based on the OpenCollection project.

While we aim to make good decisions, lasting decisions that we won’t have to drastically re-think in future years, it is also heartening to see the innovative ways in which institutions have been able to fix past mistakes. No technological decision is irreversibly poor it seems. Humans are ingenious creatures, and I trust that we can call upon the expertise of MCN-ers with not-so-stellar past experiences if we ever find ourselves in a technological bind.

Thanks again for the scholarship– it was great to come to Chicago and to be part of MCN.

Darryl MacKenzie, Museum Director/ODHS Administrator, Oliver and District Heritage Society, http://www.olivermuseum.ca/

I would like to start my article by thanking the scholarship committee of MCN for selecting me as a recipient for this year’s conference. It was truly an honour, and I came back from the conference refreshed, and full of ideas and understanding of the direction the field is taking.

I have to admit, most of the time, I felt like I was in the Neolithic watching a rocket take off to the heavens. My day to day experience is far different from most of the projects and capacity of many of the organizations showcased during the conference. I am the Director of a small history museum with a budget of less than $150,000.00, with two staff, in a small rural town 4 hours from the closest University. This experience appeared to be far different from the vast majority of participants at the Conference, who seemed to be associated with major art galleries, large history museums, or closely associated with Universities. I resonated with comments from Janice Klein, who stated that there are 14,000 museums with annual budgets of less than $250,000 who must depend on volunteer or high school students for their IT support. Fortunately, I have grown up with computers. I have participated in many of the social networking sites, and I use IT in many ways to support my work, though more pastorally than what was presented. The trick for me in the conference was to listen to the presenters, but bring what was said into the context of my experience.

One of the items that I came away with that I could implement right away was the concept of using social networking as a form of Guerrilla Marketing. This is a low cost, highly visible means of getting your name and message out. As an organization, we certainly lag far behind the curve here. We do not have a lot of pointers to our website, but if we had a presence on Facebook, MySpace and Wikipedia, which are all free sites, we could place pointers to our main website. This would increase our website effectiveness. I have recruited a student through our High School career placement counselor who is currently working with us on this.

Attached to this is development of our website. Currently it is a standardized web page using free page making software. It gives us a presence, but it has been ‘in construction’ for over a year as we have dealt with other projects. Other than telling of our hours of opening, and providing a distribution medium for our Annual General Meeting this past spring, it is underutilized. The website can provide so much more in the way of a portal to our services, especially to the archives. It should not stop there, however, and I saw a solution to one of our local planning challenges.

Many residents of my area trace their heritage identity to a gold rush town which thrived for about 15 years at the turn of the 20^th century. Although the buildings from this town have long since disappeared, there are many people in the community who would like to see this site restored to its 1890 appearance as a tourist attraction. It would not be authentic, and funding agencies have stated they would not support this initiative because the return on investment is questionable. What we can do at a fraction of the cost and in a more sustainable way, is build the site in a virtual format, and people can explore the community by entering through our website. I have broached the topic with our Economic Development Officer, and we are meeting this week to discuss possible ways to include this as an attraction to the community.

The value of the conference to me was more in the subtext and conference context. In my position, I am not simply a director. I am a curator, IT resource person, and I provide consultation to local governments on heritage conservation of community assets, among other roles and responsibilities. I glimpsed a sense of globalization that permeated some of the presentations. If one can offer a single virtual experience which brings together aspects of different cultures, times and places, where is the sense of place? How does one differentiate between the different component cultures that brought about the possibility of the experience? I came away with a greater appreciation of the need to work vigorously on conserving icons of local heritage that will continue to be attractions for real world visitors to our community. It is items which are outside of our museum walls which are our greatest cultural asset at this time. I have already written an article for the local newspaper on this topic.

Let me explain this point further. As I have taken visitors on tours of the museum, there are areas which people gloss over, because they have seen the same two-man saws in every museum they have visited from California to Alaska. There is nothing particularly unique about these items, except possibly some local pioneer once touched them. As there are a plethora of locations on the web that can provide us with images of the same type of hand saw, there is no real reason to invest significant time with what is really a non-descript item. We need to be more selective in what we promote as heritage, and how we promote and curate the items of the greatest local cultural value. In my town, the actual community has 87 years of Colonial history. Most of the items in the collection are readily available on e-bay. What we cannot duplicate are vernacular items and the local built heritage items such as the only remaining high school in Canada in the Streamline Moderne architectural style. It is the sense of time and place that has the greatest value to the community, and suggests a re-definition of what we do as an organization, and how we do it. We can still display that two person hand-saw if we want, but it needs to be placed in the context of what it means to the community’s unique heritage character.

Perhaps no where did this concept hit me more fully than the Thursday evening opening of the Art Institute of Chicago. I turned one corner, and there I saw a leather and teak Bauhaus style chair, similar to the chair my father used for several years. It was a utilitarian object for me, but here it was elevated to un objet d’art. It was illuminated in a whole new way so I gained a greater appreciation for it. It provided a better sense of time and place. Contrasting this experience with the conference presentations, the sense of the importance of this concept hit particularly forcefully. We must be more careful about what we conserve and how we present our collections. Our history museum cannot just display old items. It has to convey importance in order to give a sense of time and place. As an organization, we have to be more attentive to how our collection speaks to our unique identity.

And at the same time, it gave a sense of unease. What is my organization’s capacity to meet this change of focus? How do we redefine ourselves in the face of competition for resources if we cannot define ourselves in terms of two-man hand saws? There were several mentions of the ‘elephant in the room’ in discussions between IT professionals and Directors. The question of traditional museum professionals feeling threatened by IT is a reality. IT makes our collection available for global consumption, and we are unsure how our collection compares with others. If the organization has a unique collection such as a major art gallery, or a large history museum, then the capacity to retain a sense of identity may be buffered. I may have seen ‘American Gothic’ several times in print, but it was the ‘pilgrimage experience’ of seeing it in person; to be able to see the brush strokes and the aura of the piece that made me place it high on my ‘list of things I must do in Chicago’. I suspect that this unease of how jobs and practices will change is behind some of the suggested rivalry during the session led by Nik Honeysett. In museums, how many secretly wonder if the Emperor really does not have any clothes? That is, are we holding onto collections that may not be as unique as we would like to think? Will mass availability of two-man saws expose the weaknesses of our collection as quotidian, blasé or ineffectual, and if so, how do we justify our position?

I found the exposure to advanced cataloguing systems important to understanding some of the limitations of our jerry-rigged database. We may not need as much data, or track as many different pieces of information as some of the larger organizations presenting, but certainly a standardized format would make communication between museums easier. Toward that end, I very much appreciated the Digitization Standards for the Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation. The booklet gives clear, easy to follow instructions, and problem solving techniques. The exposure to iPod discussions and digitized audio/video tours also provided new ways of packaging existing services.

I had so many thoughts on projects which will enhance, but not replace, what we currently do. I doubt we will have time to do them, and that is what I consider the most challenging aspect of this conference. There is a lot of competition for limited resources in a small organization. Attending this conference on an annual basis would be prohibitive. The annual staff education budget would be exceeded by the cost of this conference alone. When I go to a conference, I tend to look for offerings that have a wide variety of topics from which to choose. As I indicated earlier, a small museum necessitates the wearing of many hats, and technology is just one of the concerns we must address daily. I do not believe I am alone in this concern.

On my way to Chicago, I met with colleagues from a few museums in Central Washington State. They voiced concerns about IT, specifically the data management issue, as one of their top priorities for future in service training. It is recognized as a need, but there is little chance to receive training in the field. When they found where I was heading after the meeting, they asked that I bring as much information back as I could to share what I learned. They simply could not afford either the cost and/or time where they are often the sole charge of a facility that closes for 6 months of the year to extend the budget. To that end, I was quite pleased that the conference led by example. Sessions were recorded for podcasting, many of the presenters offered slides for their discussions freely on the web, and there was reference to continued connection through musematic and archimuse. Distance education programs are on the horizon. Social networking of information and subsequently sharing where to find the information is something that will definitely help smaller museums.

As stated, however, the main concern is implementation. I fear that my colleagues in smaller museums who have not seen the vision of the future which I had the privilege of seeing through this conference may not have the capacity to adapt. We will hang on for a while and see the world change. We’ll continue to see rockets ascend, but eventually our existence may be threatened unless we take time to strategically adapt and re-define ourselves, as larger organizations have shown us through their leadership. People are already getting their information elsewhere. One speaker stated that ¾ of the visitors to the Met never go through the doors. In a small museum which depends on donations from visitors, a similar decrease in visitorship is fatal. We must act now to find ways to draw people back by offering unique services and experiences. We have to adapt to remain relevant within our niche. That message is what I consider the true value of the conference.

And for that, I am extremely thankful.

Bear with me while I go through a mid-life crisis of sorts…

I just turned 40, two days after the MCN conference ended. One can’t turn 40 without some reflection on their life; and mine, like many I’m sure, has been a twisting turning path with many unexpected events. Up until recently, I’ve always felt that I never quite fit in regarding my career. I always thought I would be an artist and strived for many years to make it happen. Unfortunately, living in the San Francisco Bay Area, I came to the realization that with things being so expensive, something had to give. After working at my Museum in various unfulfilling capacities, Membership and Registration, I knew I had to make a change for myself and for my family.

In early 2000 I found my 1^st marriage coming to an amicable end. It was the most difficult thing that I ever had to go through, compounded by the fact that my ex-wife and I had a 1 ½ year old son. It took many years to recover. I found love again, bought a new house, got married again (to the love of my life), merged our families, and now we have a 7 month old baby, one of the greatest gifts in my life. Soon after my marriage in 2004 I consciously set out to change my career direction; whether the new career direction still involved the museum or not, I needed to, both financially and mentally. While still working in Registration, I re-enrolled in school to work on my certification in web design. During this time I also volunteered to help the museum with its first iPod tour. Coincidentally, the completion of my certification coincided with the departure of a web administrator in our Marketing department. Seeing an opportunity with my new training and the work I did on the iPod tour I proposed my current position of Manager of Interactive Technology to our director, who thankfully thought it was a good idea! Now, here I am, fulfilled and happy!

The MCN just turned 35, six days before my birthday. From my observations it looks as though it might be going through a sort of mid-life crisis of its own, or at least some of its constituents. I was fortunate enough to attend the MCN conference for the first time thanks to a scholarship that I was awarded. There are many creative and engaging people working IT in museums, however, it seems that their place within their institution is being challenged — by the institution itself! One of the most compelling sessions I attended was presented by Nik Honeysett, Head of Administration at J. Paul Getty Museum (http://musematic.net/?p=279). It was centered on the idea of museum directors and their relationship with their IT professionals; however it quickly evolved into a conversation about how the IT professional fits into the museum as a whole. Like me not fitting in with my career path, it seems that a lot of my colleagues are having a hard time fitting in to their organizations.

The just of the session was that some IT professionals are accepted by their staff. They have great relations with their Directors and other departments, myself included. Others say that there is a gap between their IT department and the rest of the institution (75% of respondents to a survey). Based on comments from the audience, in the second half of the session, they are looked at as secondary players whose opinions are not valid. They tend to find themselves misunderstood and not trusted. Opinions and comments from the audience ranged from better educating your staff about your motives to completely quitting your job to avoid the conflict.

I might be overly optimistic here (a first for me), but I’m partial to the approach that I took with my own mid-life crisis. Grab the bull by the horns and cause a “sea change” in your organization. I never fashioned myself as a self promoter. In fact that might have been the problem with my art career. However, I have found in my current job that I have had to do a lot of self promotion. People just don’t get what it is that I do without a lot of explaining. But, because I enjoy my job so much, I enjoy teaching people about technology and how it can be used to help extend the museum visitor experience. It seems to be working very well.

I agree with one of the members of the audience at the session, it’s a generational thing. Somebody 10 years older than me needs a lot more convincing than someone who is 10 years younger. We are definitely in a transitional stage within museums. As Clive Izard said during the session, “We are at a point where content is king and technology is the way we will all have to go.” With technology moving so rapidly, it is hard to keep those in your institution up to speed on everything, let alone yourself. Some of your colleagues would just as soon tune you out, than listen to you explain something, but we must remain patient. We must break everything down into its simplest terms for easy digestion by those brick wall skeptics. In my opinion, analogies are king! By comparing a technologically complicated idea to something that everyone can understand, the sell becomes a lot easier.

Sometimes, when things are difficult we need to turn them on their head and shake out the confusion. Often this can leave a large mess, but once the mess is straightened out and organized, everything looks a lot clearer and all is put in its proper place. I’m fortunate enough to have a supportive staff. My Executive Director, Marketing Director, and department head are my strongest allies. I do have my challenges, but as long as I have the patience to explain technological concepts, I’m sure it will paint a clearer picture (no pun intended).

I do want to thank the Museum Computer Network, the scholarship committee especially, for the outstanding opportunity that was extended to me. I did more networking and interacting with my colleagues at the 2007 MCN Conference than I have at any other conference. Also, I want to thank all the great, compelling people who I met. I hope to carry on further discussions with you in the future.

This week, I will be posting each person’s reflections on the conference and how it impacted their work. It is over four months since the conference, and we are well into a new year. Perhaps it is a good time to take a step back and think about what we get out of professional conferences – networking and the exchange of ideas among peers. The MCN conference provides a platform to understand where we are with regard to the roles we play working with and implementing technologies in cultural organizations. These essays will show you five different points of views and perspectives on this. As I read them, it made me think about where I fit. I was surprised that my thoughts led me to identify the different stages in my career that has brought me to where I am now. Where do you stand?

The 2008 MCN conference scholarship award process will begin in late summer and announcements will be made on the MCN list serve. Look out for them and consider applying.

This first post is from Douglas Patinka, Website Manager, New Mexico Department of Cultural Affairs. http://www.nmoca.org/

On Community

Shhh. . . don’t tell anyone. I’m keystroking this in late at night after having attended a full day of sessions at MCN 2007. What a whirlwind of ideas.

I came here thinking that this was a real opportunity for me to learn about what was happening around the country in the area of Museums and information technology. I sold the idea to my supervisor by telling him just that. I figured I’d probably see a bunch of super cool demonstrations of hot new Web 2.0 applications, find out all about interesting ways museums are integrating interactivity into their exhibitions, and come home wondering how to make it all happen on no budget with no staff and too little time.

What I didn’t really realize at the time—but now it seems obvious—is that conferences are as much about the people as they are about the information that’s shared. What’s key to success then, is, after it’s all over, making sure that relationships are maintained, and continuing the conversations that began—or at least were inspired by—the conference sessions.

First of all it’s important to say, that everyone at MCN was extremely nice. I know that this is in part because I was granted a scholarship to attend—and made to stand up and wave to a group of 300 folks—but it seems to me that the kind of genuine friendliness that I encountered was driven by more than just a desire to make me feel welcome at the event. I was a real effort to make me feel part of a community.

Whether it was intentional or not, much of the discussion at the conference was about sustaining communities, as well. Certainly, the first day’s forums had community at their heart: Museum Studies Programs: That Was Then, This Is Now looked to the future of the museum information profession, asking if new professionals are getting the training they need; The Town Hall Conversation on Professionalism and Leadership presented different ways of sharing information related to the field; The MCN Presidents’ Roundtable reviewed past concerns and accomplishments and outlined the course for the future; and finally Directors and IT Professionals: A Conversation about Leadership presented a “frank discussion” about the status of IT professionals within the professional museum community—and also spotlighted a couple museums and the relationships between museum administrators and IT professionals. The presentations and ensuing discussions during this first day set the stage for the rest of the conference; they were, for me, among the best of the sessions.

Although they didn’t provide answers or even concrete direction, these sessions started me thinking about the place of information technology in museums, the role of professional organizations in nurturing and sustaining professionals, and the role that I ought to take within my own organization, the New Mexico Department of Cultural Affairs.

With that introduction, I’d like to outline some of what has been going on among the staff members of the New Mexico Department of Cultural Affairs as a way of supporting and facilitating interest in the use of information technologies within our institutions.

The New Mexico Department of Cultural Affairs is cabinet-level state agency that serves as the administrative center of New Mexico‘s state-owned cultural institutions. Among our 15 divisions are included eight museums, six state monuments, the state library, the state arts agency, an archaeological services agency, and the state’s historic preservation division. To various degrees each of these institutions maintains collections of objects or records, presents exhibitions and performances, or provides support to other cultural organizations throughout the state. Geographically, we are spread across New Mexico, and our collecting and exhibition interests range from natural history and science to folk art. We are a diverse group of institutions and individuals. One commonality is that, like most cultural heritage organizations, we have little resources or staff for expanding our technology-related programs. A small, centralized IT staff in Santa Fe administers a helpdesk, while those institutions outside the capitol city have a single individual dedicated to IT related issues: maintaining computer networks and phone systems, supporting various types of software, and performing the various unrelated tasks that generally fall under the classification “I.T.” Among our 15 divisions and 500 employees is one individual whose focus it the development and maintenance of the department’s more than 30 web sites.

And yet, despite our challenges, we, as a group, have a real interest in using technology to reach out and tell our stories, share our collections, and complement our programming.

Following the 2006 Museums and the Web conference in Albuquerque, a group of individuals—educators, curators, collections managers, and others—within DCA formed an informal “community of practice” intended as a way of supporting and coordinating projects seeking to use technology to meet our mission goals. The “New Media and Technologies Group” has meet periodically—sometimes monthly, sometimes less frequently—and has had some impact on the way we work. We’re an informal group, usually meeting over lunch, and with no direction except what we deem is appropriate. Yet we’ve made progress.

Among our successes:

· Development of standards and best practices for all new Web-based projects

· The production of a publication inventorying and documenting all collections-related digitization projects in the department

· The implementation of a departmental intranet (complete with Web 2.0 features we’re not quite ready for), intended to facilitate communication and sharing of resources among department staff

But the greatest benefit of holding our irregular meetings—usually focusing on a particular topic or project—has been the personal connection our meetings have fostered. Now each of us—working quietly alone on a Web project in Alamogordo, or seeking advice on a digitization project in Santa Fe—has somewhere to turn, and importantly, with the creation of the NMTG and the department’s intranet site, the mechanism to sustain such relationships.

I came away from MCN 2007 thinking about these things, seeing the importance of communication among individuals engaged in similar activities, and with a renewed interest in finding better ways for those within my organization to share what we learn.