Research Notes
From HorizonMuseum
This page is intended to provide additional background how to approach answering the Research Questions. Please feel free to add your own thoughts or questions. Our goal is to have all of the members of the Advisory Board approaching the Research Questions in the same fashion.
1) Our essential focus for the Horizon Report for Museums is cultural stewardship, education, interpretation, management, audience engagement, and other collections- or content-related aspects of museum practice (as opposed to other possible foci, such as administration, safety, or general infrastructure). While there will always be overlap and gray areas, we are looking for technologies, challenges, and trends that are uniquely relevant to those endeavors, and will specifically consider the ways in which these technologies impact museums.
2) The audience for the Horizon Report for Museums is twofold. Museum directors and senior management will benefit from the Report’s concise descriptions of the technologies to watch. A secondary audience includes both museum professionals—including technologists, educators, conservators, curators, and others—but also colleagues in related fields, such as librarians and archivists, vendors and consultants, academics, and funders. Keeping our audience in mind will give focus to our discussion and the eventual publication.
3) It is important that we be able to cite actual examples, demonstration projects, papers, and reports, for every topic we discuss in the publication. Readers expect to find abundant information on the topics selected for inclusion. This requirement will necessarily lead to the elimination of items for which there is great enthusiasm, but few examples (or few examples relevant to museums), including things we collectively feel ought to happen, but for which evidence of likely mainstream adoption is scant. Items with solid supporting links and materials will naturally be ranked higher as we winnow the lists down. As such, we encourage you to list links to actual examples or other relevant materials for as many items as you can, whether they are yours or contributed by another Advisory Board member.
4) All topics will be considered within the timeframe when it is supposed that the technology will enter "mainstream use." For purposes of this project, a technology is considered to have entered "mainstream use" when it has been adopted by 20% of relevant institutions (in this case, museums of all sizes and types).
We should be honest that probably no communications technology other than the phone, fax machine, e-mail and word processing has penetrated 20% of 'museums of all sizes and types' = at least 90% of institutions that could belong to the AASLH do not have full-time staff. I would not be surprised to find that 80% of institutions do not have their own websites. Some other measure of adoption time-frames is going to have to be used.[David Bearman]
5) An important aspect of the final report will be the summary of relevance to museum practice of each technology cited. Advisory Board comments about the impact or relevance of a particular technology are encouraged at any point in the process.
Here are some specific tips related to each of the questions:
Research Question One: How do the technologies that museums should be using today or during the next five years compare with the 2008 Short List 
of twelve technologies identified by the 2008 Horizon Report for higher education? That is to say, which are likely to enter mainstream museum use within the targeted timeframe? Which will be important, but on a different timeframe? Which of these technologies would fall off the list when considered through the lens of potential applications for museums and museum practice?
For this first edition of the Horizon Report for Museums, we are asking Board Members to review the conclusions drawn by the Advisory Board of the higher-education-focused Horizon Report, released early this year and to comment on each of the twelve items selected for the 2008 Short List . Certainly we expect that there will be some convergence (as well as some divergence) between emerging technologies in higher education and museums, but we have no preconceived notion of the extent of the coincidence. Where there is a strong sense that a technology cited in the original Short List is also appropriate for the museum edition, we seek additional, museum-appropriate examples. When a technology that has been selected for the original Short List seems to Board Members to be unlikely to enter mainstream museum use in the near future, Board members’ comments about why this is so are also welcome. Board members should comment on as many of the twelve short list items as they feel comfortable with; even a simple vote of “yes!” or “absolutely not” is acceptable, although we certainly hope that you’ll comment liberally if you have an opinion. In some cases, you may want to appropriate from topics described in the original Short List, broadening, narrowing, or refocusing the concepts: feel free to do so. The editors will be responsible for collating the thoughts and ideas expressed in response to Question One into a single list.
Research Question Two: What technologies that are not on the list developed so far need to be considered in creating a "short list" expressly for museums? These might include technologies that have a solid user base in consumer, entertainment, telecommunications, imaging, or other industries.
This question pushes the notion of "established" technologies, seeking to uncover tools, ideas, or processes that are well established "in the world," but not yet in museums. Answers should be easy to support with actual examples and pointers to things people outside of museums are actually doing today.
A small number of ideas or technologies in this category may still be only found in research contexts. Nonetheless, some work should be happening that we can point to for those who wish to learn more. Three to five years is not a long time for the museum community to turn its attention to something, thus we should see evidence of pioneer efforts that can be documented.
Listing the actual companies or organizations working on the items listed here is very very important, as we often will follow up with them to learn more as we turn to the actual writing.
Research Question Three: What do you see as the key challenges related to the adoption of emerging technology in museums during the next five years?
Research Question Four: What technology trends do you expect will have a significant impact on the ways in which museums approach their missions during the next five years?'
Questions Three and Four are more subjective. Here the collective opinion of the Advisory Board is the essential factor for inclusion, so the rankings are the primary reason an item will be included or not. Challenges and trends that will achieve the highest rankings will be those for which supporting data is strongest, or for which Board members have made compelling arguments.
Please add your thoughts and questions below:
- Click "Edit" above and add your thoughts here [Your Name]
