The Minnesota Historical Society’s Local History Services helps Minnesotans preserve and share their history. This blog is a resource of best practices on the wide variety of museum, preservation, conservation, funding, and non-profit management topics. We’re here to help.
How many of your organizations collect family Christmas letters? How long have you collected them? What kind of evidence do you have to know that they are used? Any downside to collecting family Christmas letters?
In a sense nonprofit historical organizations have always been vertically oriented. Even though many have tried to specialize and play to certain strengths, they also control the raw materials (archives and collections), manufacturing (reference libraries, exhibits, historic markers, etc.) and distribution (interpretation, digitization, public programs, etc.) Nonprofit historical organizations continue to have an unfragmented supply chain to deliver experiences demanded by the public. Perhaps this "new" business trend will not have much impact on how nonprofit historical organizations work, but the blog suggests one thing that might bear watching: the speed of communications which has created a flatter world around us will demand greater swiftness in responding to changing consumer needs.
Although the article does not mention any museums in Minnesota that have moved, the article does talk about the Mount Horeb (WI) Mustard Museum moving to the wealthy Madison WI suburb of Middleton and renaming itself the "National Mustard Museum." The museum is doing so to place its organization on better financial footing and provide more access to people. However, the author, Joelle Seligson, states that the "public love for museums is tied to their sameness, the sense that they will preserve and protect what they hold and remain in place for posterity." The Mustard Museum will no longer be in the same place anymore.
In Minnesota there are examples of moves, too. For example Fort Belmont in Jackson was originally established in 1958 to take advantage of the traffic on US Route 71 south of town. When I-90 was built in 1974, much of the tourist traffic seemed to disappear. Fort Belmont completed a relocation to a site visible from I-90 a couple years ago. Neither the original attraction nor this one are on the actual site of the historic Fort Belmont. But, this is an example of an institution that is placing its facility where people are anyway.
Still, relocating an entire facility is a costly and extraordinary endeavor. In considering a move, how might an organization balance the "public love for museums ... that they will ... remain in place" with the public's feet? If traffic has migrated from its historical location, must also the historical organization also migrate in order to be where people are? How should a historical organization balance financial considerations against mission which is so often tied to place? (History Where It Happened)
Alison Circle, a librarian who writes the "Bubble Room" blog for Library Journal, recently had a posting on "Top Ten Things for Marketers to Try." Number 5 is Learn a New Technology: "Last Friday I had a conversation with a friend about social media. I loved what she had to say: the people who are successful in this arena just jumped in feet first into the deep end. They didn't worry about how, or who, or metrics, or audience. They just went for it. So if you don't have a Facebook page or a Twitter account, open one today."
Do you agree or disagree that jumping right in the deep end is the best way to get started with social media?
The conversation about credentialing local history workers tends to be periodic. It often revolves around momentary needs to assure employers, the public and funders of the legitimacy of local history work. American Association of Museums' Emerging Museum Professional Survey provides a glimpse of new museum worker needs, which could inform the discussion as credentials not only need to help the public understand what we do but also serve the worker.
The purpose of credentials really is to build trust in a knowledge base; in other words, credentials establish legitimacy. While some credentials require a degree from an accredited educational institution, in many fields these often come from a variety of sources that demonstrate the integrity of the worker's skills and knowledge.
How might the local history community in Minnesota certify its trustworthy workers? Would local history workers benefit from a credential? Here are a few (mostly) do-it-yourself credentials that spring to mind, with both pros and cons:
Awards Programs: Minnesota Alliance of Local History Museums, American Association for State and Local History, Preservation Alliance of Minnesota, and Friends of Minnesota Barns all offer awards programs. These are free to enter, but remember only the work that truly represents the best of the field gets recognized. Projects and functions that do not go above and beyond a routine generally do not receive recognition. However, sometimes it is the discipline of routine that needs recognition most.
Small Museum Pro!promises certification for workers in small and rural museums throughout the country by focusing on practical museum training. All-online courses cover Museum Administration, Collections Management, Collections Care, Exhibitions, and Museum Education and Outreach. Small Museum Pro! program should affordably fill gaps in professional training common to among small, emerging and rural museum workers. Courses cost $195 each. To receive Small Museum Pro! certification, participants must complete all five courses.
Continuing Education: A survey conducted at the Minnesota Local History Workshops this past spring revealed the preference among survey respondents statewide that, to stay current, local history workers should be accomplishing 15 hours of continuing education annually. That means reading trade publications, attending workshops and classes, participating in conferences, teaching classes, being active in other meetings (such as serving on the board of the Minnesota Alliance of Local History Museums, on a Minnesota Association of Museums committee, etc.). Keeping track of time spent improving skills could inspire trust in potential funders. Doubters may, however, dismiss your records as not measuring to a common standard.
Let's continue the conversation. While time is a limited resource, it is necessary to spend time validating what we do in the eyes of the public and funders. How do you do that? Would it be useful to have some organization set a common standard? If so, should that organization be broad (e.g. a museum or nonprofit association) or focused (e.g. a history organization)? National, or statewide? How might credentials matter to your board, the public or funders?
I’m interested in learning how other museums and cultural institutions are engaging their communities through social media technologies. Are you? Help me gather benchmark data by completing this survey about what types of social media are being used by museums, how much time is spent on it and who in the organization manages this engagement.
This survey should take less than 15 minutes to complete.
If you are interested in receiving a copy of the survey results, please provide your email address.
Director of Enterprise Technology
Minnesota Historical Society
Like many museums, we receive copies of newsletters and mailing from a goodly number of our fellow historical organizations. I will admit that I don’t always have time to digest everything that is printed. But on occasion, an item will get my attention.
A copy that recently crossed my desk contained an intriguing statistic. In a breakdown of their 2008 attendance figures, this organization included web site visits, which amounted to nearly 2/3 of their total attendance for the annum. It got me to ponder again the question of whether or not we should include web site hits in our attendance figures.
We have never counted web hits and have no plan to do so any time soon. Why? For one, we do not use a pay counter service so out stats are not as thorough as others might have. (We use the free feature of StatCounter dot com.) Differentiating from actual “human” contact versus machine or spider contacts could be time-consuming. As a result, I have been somewhat suspicious of institutions that have rather large web site hit figures and use those to bolster attendance numbers.
Is there a better way to handle this issue? Have any of you found a good way to parse those hits to determine a reliable number? Should grants applications from foundations and other agencies even be asking institutions for those figures as a requisite for funding?
Cokato Historical Society
A lot of ink has been used to detail how little needed another museum - especially a historic house museum - actually is. Carol Kammen in her "On Doing Local History" column in the Summer 2009 issue of History News reports on a 1936 AASLH census of history related organizations that showed 583 in the United States that year. She notes the count probably was less than complete. Today estimates put that number around17,500, with most having been established in the last 40 years. Over-organization is a concern when there is a finite number of resources (time, money, people) to support each organization.
Kammen briefly touches on the sacrifices made to establish organizational presence in its community. Many unseen volunteer hours went into organizing, collecting, indexing, and making accessible the history preserved by the organization that often the community takes for granted the history without acknowledging the serious effort applied by organizers. Often efforts to establish organizations require sacrifices, but these resources can wear thin in time leaving the organization undercapitalized at its core. While some experts may say it is number of organizations and rate of creation, the real concern more likely is the unsustainable undercapitalization of core functions.
In working with well-intentioned citizens who wish to organize to preserve history, these arguments about over and under really do not concern the enthusiast. The response often is that where others have failed, they are sure to succeed. How could they not? They can see the passion, excitement, and energy around them at least in the short term, that they hope to build for the long term. But building on emotion is problematic at best and betting on the outcome is almost a near-certainty for both the enthusiasts and observers (but with two totally different expected results). The field needs to develop a menu of measures from which enthusiasts may choose in order to better evaluate their long term chances of success.
Local history organizations face these same challenges within their communities. How do you awaken enthusiasts to the hard realities of successful organizing to accomplish what they think they want to do?