[MCN-L] Online vs physical visits

[Trilce Navarrete]

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 wrote:

> 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  >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  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 bet

[MCN-L] Online vs physical visits

[Leonard Steinbach]

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 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  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 use, not just digital ones! Easier said than done, of course.
> >
> > Is anyone aggregating the links and thoughts provided in these important
> > emails to the listserv in a blog post or other? If not, I'd be happy to
> > start a post on the Musematic blog (or other recommended site) as I'm
> sure
> > many others have useful references and past posts to add as well.
> >
> > Nancy
> >
> > -- We all get a lot of email; here's how I try to help:
> > http://emailcharter.org --
> >
> > Nancy Proctor, PhD
> > Head of Mobile Strategy & Initiatives
> > Office of the Assistant Secretary for Education and Access
> > Smithsonian Institution
> >
> > http://SI.edu/Mobile
> > proctorn at si.edu
> > @nancyproctor
> >
> > t: +1-202-633-8439
> > c: +1-301-642-6257
> >
> > Want to mobilize?
> >
> >  *   Sign up for the SI Mobile mailing list here:
> > http://si-listserv.si.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SIMOBILE
> >  *   Visit our blog: http://Smithsonian20.si.edu and wiki:
> > http://smithsonian-webstrategy.wikispaces.com/Mobile
> >  *   Follow the museum mobile community: #SImob

[MCN-L] Online vs physical visits

[Proctor, Nancy]

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 use, not 
just digital ones! Easier said than done, of course. 

Is anyone aggregating the links and thoughts provided in these important emails 
to the listserv in a blog post or other? If not, I'd be happy to start a post 
on the Musematic blog (or other recommended site) as I'm sure many others have 
useful references and past posts to add as well.

Nancy

-- We all get a lot of email; here's how I try to help: http://emailcharter.org 
--

Nancy Proctor, PhD
Head of Mobile Strategy & Initiatives
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Education and Access
Smithsonian Institution

http://SI.edu/Mobile
proctorn at si.edu
@nancyproctor

t: +1-202-633-8439
c: +1-301-642-6257

Want to mobilize?

 *   Sign up for the SI Mobile mailing list here: 
http://si-listserv.si.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SIMOBILE
 *   Visit our blog: http://Smithsonian20.si.edu and wiki: 
http://smithsonian-webstrategy.wikispaces.com/Mobile
 *   Follow the museum mobile community: #SImobile #mtogo and at 
http://wiki.MuseumMobile.info

To unsubscribe from the SIMOBILE list, or change your subscription options,
please click here: 
http://si-listserv.si.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SIMOBILE&A=1in-box! 

[MCN-L] Online vs physical visits

[Morgan Holzer]

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  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 use, not just digital ones! Easier said than done, of course.
>
> Is anyone aggregating the links and thoughts provided in these important
> emails to the listserv in a blog post or other? If not, I'd be happy to
> start a post on the Musematic blog (or other recommended site) as I'm sure
> many others have useful references and past posts to add as well.
>
> Nancy
>
> -- We all get a lot of email; here's how I try to help:
> http://emailcharter.org --
>
> Nancy Proctor, PhD
> Head of Mobile Strategy & Initiatives
> Office of the Assistant Secretary for Education and Access
> Smithsonian Institution
>
> http://SI.edu/Mobile
> proctorn at si.edu
> @nancyproctor
>
> t: +1-202-633-8439
> c: +1-301-642-6257
>
> Want to mobilize?
>
>  *   Sign up for the SI Mobile mailing list here:
> http://si-listserv.si.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SIMOBILE
>  *   Visit our blog: http://Smithsonian20.si.edu and wiki:
> http://smithsonian-webstrategy.wikispaces.com/Mobile
>  *   Follow the museum mobile community: #SImobile #mtogo and at
> http://wiki.MuseumMobile.info
>
> To unsubscribe from the SIMOBILE list, or change your subscription options,
> please click here:
> http://si-listserv.si.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SIMOBILE&A=1in-box!
> ___
> You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer
> Network (http://www.mcn.edu)
>
> To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu
>
> To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
> http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
>
> The MCN-L archives can be found at:
> http://mcn.edu/pipermail/mcn-l/
>

[MCN-L] Online vs physical visits

[Sarah Clark]

Bernard, there is a video of a panel discussion, available on youtube, that
explores the topic of museum web sites and their value.  You can search for
it by title, "What's the Point of a Museum Web Site."  The meat of the
discussion starts about 5 minutes in; there's some good philosophical as
well as practical insight.

Sarah Clark
Curator
Staten Island Historical Society
Staten Island, NY
718-351-1611, ext. 272
www.historicrichmondtown.org

Explore our collections at: http://historicrichmondtown.org/collections

--

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 19:59:38 +
From: Bernard Hamlin 
To: "mcn-l at mcn.edu" 
Subject: [MCN-L] Online vs physical visits
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Hey there,

I've been having a long running discussion with our team about the impact of
our website on physical visits to our building.
The rub appears to be the idea that offering a Web experience of objects and
exhibitions will cannibalise real experiences.
I'm not convinced that this is the case but I don't have any numbers, which
are important! Would anyone out there be willing to share door numbers say
before and after launching an online collection? Or a similar metric?

Thanks

Bernard Hamlin
IT Coordinator
Otago Museum
 

[MCN-L] Online vs physical visits

[Nick Poole]

Dear colleagues, 

Many thanks to Bernard for raising this question about the relationship between 
real and virtual visits. It comes up fairly regularly, and I am not sure that 
it is so easy to dismiss. 

As Bruce says, there is certainly a body of evidence which suggests in broad 
terms that online access is good for onsite visitor stats, and I think (I 
hope!) we have moved past the simple prejudice which holds that online 
cannibalises onsite.

Once past the prejudice, though, there is still a vast evidential gap, and it 
is one which as a community I believe we ought to start to close. If I am a 
trained marketing professional or a finance director, I am going to ask a 
perfectly legitimate question about the ROI on my investment in online activity 
(and therefore which activities I ought to prioritise in future). As a 
collections professional, I still don't have a valid answer (supported by clear 
evidence) about how online will reinforce the customer experience, for which 
demographics and in which ways. 

In my experience, it remains the case that most online activity for museums is 
assertion-based, rather than evidence-based. For example, I know that there are 
some audiences for which a virtual visit does, indeed, replace a physical visit 
- and that's OK. For others, the online offer will only ever serve as a brand 
extension for the real, physical and sensory experience of being proximate to 
extraordinary things. For others still, there is no way they'll ever be able to 
visit in person, but the simple fact of discovery will enrich their lives every 
bit as much as if they were in the room with the object. 

I have absolutely no doubt that a coherent, integrated and creative digital 
offer can extent the depth and value of the end-user experience, and as Bruce 
correctly observes, the distinction between 'real' and 'virtual' is like to 
become quaintly archaic in the years ahead. 

If Bernard is going to win his argument, though, then he needs an 
evidentially-valid way of showing that online does not equate simply to 'more', 
but 'better, deeper, more engaged and longer-term'. In much the same way as 
broadcast media had to find ways of showing depth, engagement and ROI with 
their output, I don't think it is sufficient for us to keep saying 'digital is 
good'. We need to be able to say, 'here's what digital adds to your marketing 
and audience engagement mix, and here's the kind of impact, reach and return 
you can expect from it'.

I'd really love to know whether people have been able to develop clear, 
segmented impact indicators from their online activity?

All best, 

Nick  


Nick Poole
Chief Executive Officer
Collections Trust
Has your museum joined Hidden Treasures 2014? Promoting public engagement with 
collections in partnership with the Independent. 
http://www.hiddentreasures.org.uk





Linked ??
Join CT's Collections Management Group

Visit Collections Trust online
www.collectionstrust.org.uk 
www.collectionslink.org.uk
www.culturegrid.org.uk

Company Registration No: 1300565 Registered Charity No: 273984
Registered Office: Collections Trust, WC 209, Natural History Museum, Cromwell 
Road, London, SW7 5BD


-Original Message-
From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of 
Bruce Wyman
Sent: 31 July 2013 21:46
To: Bernard Hamlin; Museum Computer Network Listserv
Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Online vs physical visits

Bernard - 

Here's the quick answer: Online experiences and availability don't cannibalize 
physical visits.

That you're still having this conversation is, um, unfortunate. I think most 
staff would acknowledge that books - with their incredibly high resolution 
images and detail that can be copied and reused - have never been a deterrent 
to exhibits. Your digital presence, website, publications, whatever, is 
scarcely different.

But you asked for quantifiable information rather than pontification. ;)

Paul Marty has a pretty good paper on the topic at 
<http://arizona.openrepository.com/arizona/bitstream/10150/106394/1/marty_mwmv_part1.pdf>.
 He even has tables for the text-impaired amongst our colleagues.

The paper references great sources (which will lead to other quantified 
information). 

Quoting from the paper: 

"...The concern focuses on whether museums providing online access to their 
collections will see a corresponding decrease in physical visits. 
At some stage in the planning process, someone usually asks, "if visitors can 
access our digital collections using the Internet, will they still come to the 
museum in person?"

The commonsense answer to this question is that, to the best of current 
knowledge, online visitors are also physical visitors. Logically, this makes 
sense; no one asks: "If people can look at pictures of beaches online, will 
they still vacation in Florida

[MCN-L] Online vs physical visits

[Bernard Hamlin]

Hey there,

I've been having a long running discussion with our team about the impact of 
our website on physical visits to our building.
The rub appears to be the idea that offering a Web experience of objects and 
exhibitions will cannibalise real experiences.
I'm not convinced that this is the case but I don't have any numbers, which are 
important! Would anyone out there be willing to share door numbers say before 
and after launching an online collection? Or a similar metric?

Thanks

Bernard Hamlin
IT Coordinator
Otago Museum
 

[MCN-L] Online vs physical visits

[Bruce Wyman]

Bernard ? 

Here's the quick answer: Online experiences and availability don't cannibalize 
physical visits.

That you're still having this conversation is, um, unfortunate. I think most 
staff would acknowledge that books ? with their incredibly high resolution 
images and detail that can be copied and reused ? have never been a deterrent 
to exhibits. Your digital presence, website, publications, whatever, is 
scarcely different.

But you asked for quantifiable information rather than pontification. ;)

Paul Marty has a pretty good paper on the topic at 
.
 He even has tables for the text-impaired amongst our colleagues.

The paper references great sources (which will lead to other quantified 
information). 

Quoting from the paper: 

"?The concern focuses on whether museums 
providing online access to their collections will see a corresponding decrease 
in physical visits. 
At some stage in the planning process, someone usually asks, ?if visitors can 
access our digital 
collections using the Internet, will they still come to the museum in person??

The commonsense answer to this question is that, to the best of current 
knowledge, online 
visitors are also physical visitors. Logically, this makes sense; no one asks: 
?If people can look at 
pictures of beaches online, will they still vacation in Florida?? In theory, 
the ability to access 
virtual museum resources online should serve as a lure, encouraging potential 
museum-goers to 
visit the physical installation. But is this true? Haley Goldman and Wadman 
wrote,
?The relationship between virtual museum sites and physical sites has not been
extensively researched. [...] Museum Web site staff that we spoke with felt 
that the 
museum Web site boosted attendance for the physical museum, but they had no 
concrete 
evidence to prove it. While there are no studies disproving the commonsense 
approach,
one can always have more studies with solid, detailed data that backs up this 
theory?
(Haley Goldman and Wadman 2002; cf. McKenzie 1997).

Recently, a number of surveys have provided compelling evidence that online 
museums actually 
drive physical museum attendance instead of discouraging physical visits; in 
the majority of 
studies, planning a museum visit is consistently cited as the primary reason 
people visit museum 
websites (Haley Goldman and Schaller 2004; cf. Bowen, Bennet, and Johnson 1998; 
Chadwick 
and Boverie 1999). Kravchyna and Hastings (2002) found that 57% of museum 
website users 
visit museum websites both before and after they visit physical museums. 
Similarly, Thomas and 
Carey (2005) found that 70% of museum visitors specifically looked for online 
information prior 
to a museum visit, and that 57% said the information they found online 
increased their desire to 
visit the museum in person."

-bw.

On Jul 31, 2013, at 12:59 PM, Bernard Hamlin  wrote:

> Hey there,
> 
> I've been having a long running discussion with our team about the impact of 
> our website on physical visits to our building.
> The rub appears to be the idea that offering a Web experience of objects and 
> exhibitions will cannibalise real experiences.
> I'm not convinced that this is the case but I don't have any numbers, which 
> are important! Would anyone out there be willing to share door numbers say 
> before and after launching an online collection? Or a similar metric?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Bernard Hamlin
> IT Coordinator
> Otago Museum
> 
> ___
> You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
> Network (http://www.mcn.edu)
> 
> To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu
> 
> To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
> http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
> 
> The MCN-L archives can be found at:
> http://mcn.edu/pipermail/mcn-l/
> 



Bruce Wyman
bwyman at teufelkind.net