Dear all,
To further support the discussion and the gathering/sharing of experience
measuring the impact of online activities, I'd like to propose a panel on
ROI for the MCN conference. It may be a bit late to organize something for
MCN2013 but perhaps it is just enough time to prepare some indicators, test
them and report on the findings during MCN2014.
It would be interesting to compare indicators for online / onsite access.
Though the institutional mission continues to be an important starting
point, the magnitude of visitor numbers and the nature of online activity
prevents for making simple comparisons (e.g. number of visitors, or
duration of visit). I would advocate for a complementary set of indicators
where the onsite and the online each respond to different user needs in the
best way they can.
If there is interest for this, I am happy to organize a ROI panel for
MCN2014.
best
Trilce
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Leonard Steinbach lensteinbach at
gmail.comwrote:
Morgan,
You just beat me to the send key on this one. ROI is measured by both
highly tangible and more intangible results, such as fulfilling the mission
irrespective of whether feet pass through the door. I noted this in
reviewing a number of museum missions in advance of an MCN conference
discussion related to the topic a while back. It is interesting how
marketing and business units may still tend to constrict the bounds of
ROI, as they still consider a successful financial and human resource
investment return in terms of conversions (the term for-profit businesses
use) which could mean admissions, retail, etc. Yet, I wonder how a Board
might respond at hearing that hundreds or thousands of school children were
using the web site as a surrogate for class visits they can no longer
afford, yet still integrating the museum content into their curriculum, and
developing long term bonds with those kids (and maybe their parents).
Would they say this doesnt count. There are many examples one could give.
This issue has come up at least as far back as the inception of broadcast
radio networks, when they were not permitted for years to play recorded
music, lest they preempt record purchases. Today, even orchestras are
putting samples of their performances online *to generate audiences* and
the Met's theatrical broadcasts of operas has not caused the Opera House to
play to empty seats. And by the way, art museum exhibits have just started
to come to theaters near you, too.
http://www.twincities.com/entertainment/ci_22984422/museum-exhibitions-come-movie-theaters
I remember working with a Chief Financial Officer who asked me as I
submitted the web development budget for the subsequent year, Isnt this
website stuff finished yet? Somehow I dont think she asked the Director a
similar question about acquisitions for the collection. Some day perhaps
she will find the former question similarly moot.
As the definition of museum evolves.. I hope to live long enough to see
ICOM and AAM recognize museums which are only online and meet particular
criteria as bona fide and accreditable ... maybe AAM and AAMD has to get
out the word, or make it part of the ethic as much as they have both
promoted education and civic engagement, that getting museum content online
and out there, in oh so many forms, is a valid and good thing and part of
being of museum of today. Period.
Len Steinbach
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Morgan Holzer morganholzer at nypl.org
wrote:
Bernard,
For me, (someone whose job relies heavily on statistics and user
research),
this question actually simply comes down to your mission statement. I
looked your's up (
http://www.otagomuseum.govt.nz/about-us/corporate-information/) and in
part, it says:
Mission: To inspire and enrich our communities, and enhance
understanding
of the world through our collection, our people and the stories we
share...
Expanding joy: Reaching out to our communities and enabling access for
all.
I'd wager that the vast majority of museum mission statements include
something about education/outreach/access in regards to collections, and
do
not actually contain any mention of getting people in the door. Not
putting
up online collections/exhibitions is actually contrary to your stated
goals
of enabling access for all, and specifically targeting access for
those
who can attend.
Of course, metrics and research help bolster the argument, but I think
mission-driven arguments are always a good place to start.
~Morgan
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Proctor, Nancy ProctorN at si.edu wrote:
I really appreciated Bruce Wyman and Nick Poole's responses to the
question about online cannibalizing in-person museum visits. Sadly this
is
still a question museum technologists face, but more importantly I
agree
we
need to do better at measuring ROI - though I would add, on all
platforms
museums
