Perhaps I can provide a few broad observations, having worked on strategic technology plans for a number of museums and other organizations.
I think it is true that most museums do an overall strategic plan first, and only then turn their attention to the technology needed to realize their goals. In most cases that is a reasonable course to take, since strategy should drive technology, and not vice versa. If I am working on a technology plan and no overall strategy document exists, I spend a lot of time talking about mission before getting down to technology objectives. Having said that, it is becoming more and more difficult (and expensive) to ignore information technology planning when discussing a museum's strategy and objectives. In most organizations, IT is no longer just a value-added "extra," but an integral part of day to day experience for staff, volunteers, and visitors. I suppose what I am arguing is that the IT Strategic Plan may not need to be "fully integrated" with the overall Strategic Plan--but there should at least be a symbiotic relationship between them. If pressed, I would say the more integration between the two, the better; but it is often difficult enough to get everyone working together to do one at a time! I agree that complexity is a bigger issue than budgeting in getting an IT plan off the ground, but budgetary and structural issues can be a problem. There is no standard way to budget for technology--every museum seems to handle it differently. If every department does its own thing, they have maximum flexibility for how they fund and select projects, but eventually the museum winds up with a varied array of systems that do not work well together. There is also the danger of funding projects based on the "squeaky wheel" method--whoever begs/complains longest and loudest gets their IT project moved to the top of the priority list. So why don't more museums have formal technology plans? Larger museums probably have the capability, but simply don't want to devote the time. Smaller museums have neither the staff nor the time. A Strategic Information Technology Plan (well defined by Greg Smith below) is a bridge between the programs and operations world and the IT world. In most organizations, these worlds do not speak the same language. A museum may be able to find an appropriate "translator" on staff or on the board, or may have to bring in a consultant (I'm not the only one out there doing this kind of work). The dividends are significant, though--not least in an enhanced ability to raise funding for projects that can be shown to fit into an overall institutional strategy. -------------------------------------------------------- Michael W. Dula, Ph.D. Dula & Associates Management Consultants Specializing in Technology and Communications 2545 Page Drive Altadena, CA 91001 626-398-7403 www.michaeldula.com mailto:[email protected] -----Original Message----- From: Greg Smith [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 8:59 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Web or IT Plans as Part of Museum Planning While I think the fact that technology is often considered an "adminstrative" or "overhead" expense is an exacerbating factor, I'm in the camp who believe the complexity of preparing and sustaining a relevant and usable global technology plan for a Museum is the main challenge. We recently underwent a professional audit of our Technology Planning and Management processes which may help simplify - or complicate(?) - the issue. The auditor, who used the CobiT (Control Objectives for Information and related Technolgy) framework for his work, made a clear distinction is his recommendations between a Technology Plan and a Strategic Information Technology Plan. The former is, in his view, a primarily technical document which includes things like the network architecture, corporate application standards, etc. The Strategic Information Technology Plan is, on the other hand, a document which focuses on mid to long term business needs and opportunities and what broadly defined technology capabilities, services and investments are required to meet these needs and opportunities. Greg Smith Manager, IT Canadian Museum of Nature > -----Original Message----- > From: Ilana Trager [SMTP:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 3:45 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Web or IT Plans as Part of Museum Planning > > Here's a theory: All non-profits, including museums, want to show as > little of their budget going to admninistration as possible. It's > important when persuing grants and public support that we produce > balance sheets that show > most of our budget going to "programs," not "administration." IT is > considered "administration," unless it's shown as part of a program > department's budget, like curatorial, education, or even marketing. So, I > suspect the typical lack of a comprehensive technology plan has less to do > with the complex nature of museum tech, and more to do with avoiding a > managment style that will complicate the issue of reporting the admin vs > program budget ratio. - i > _____________________ > Ilana Trager > Information Systems Manager > Bellevue Art Museum > > office 425.519.0766 > fax 425.637.1799 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Guy Hermann [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 8:52 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re:Web or IT Plans as Part of Museum Planning > > > This comes up periodically on this list and I have yet to see any > meaningful integration of a technology plan with any museum's > strategic plan. More typically, a museum will include programs that > depend on technology to their plan and then look at the ramifications > of that separately. > > I am beginning to think that this is because of the exceptionally > complex nature of the museum technology environment--there are just > too many needs to serve. Creating a fully integrated plan that > addresses collections, the web, education, ticketing, fund raising, > group scheduling, membership, facility management, accounting, etc. is > simply too much, especially since all of these are still moving > targets. > > I have done a few technology assessments recently--the precursor to > planning. The results have been a better sense of priorities and of > what is possible, but even in these committed organizations, a fully > integrated plan is too ambitious. > > What do others think? Why don't more museums have formal technology > plans? > > ----------------------------------------------------- > Guy Hermann > 8 1/2 Godfrey Street > Mystic, CT 06355 > > home: 860-536-2994 > cell: 860-857-7363 > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > [email protected] > > --- > You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected] To > unsubscribe send a blank email to > [email protected] --- You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email protected] --- You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email protected]
