Upload
ashtreex
View
329
Download
4
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Addresses the arguments and experiences of quantitative versus qualitative measures for managing museum collections
Citation preview
Paintings by numbers
Does sustainable collection management require statistics?
Does sustainable collection management require statistics?
Trouble with numbers Words and quality Good numbers –
Systems Risks
Public value
1974-
Rayo
1974-1982-
Raynor Scrutiny - museums
1974-1982-1988-
The Cost of Collecting
Lord, Lord & NIcks
1974-1982-1988-1989-
The Cost of Collecting
Lord, Lord & NIcks
1974-1982-1988-1989-
1974-1982-1988-1989-1990’s-
1974-1982-1988-1989-1990’s-1998-
1974-1982-1988-1989-1990’s-1998-1999-
1974-1982-1988-1989-1990’s-1998-1999-2000-
1974-1982-1988-1989-1990’s-1998-1999-2000-2002-
1974-1982-1988-1989-1990’s-1998-1999-2000-2002-2004-
1974-1982-1988-1989-1990’s-1998-1999-2000-2002-2004-2005-
Performance indicator: thickness?
2000 - 10cm
2004 - 15cm2012?
2012 -25cm?
And from the Netherlands …
Problems with numbers Inconsistent interpretation of statistics Changes over time Ambiguous definitions Statistically illiterate - “to achieve a robust
monthly sample would require an annual sample size of almost 5,000 visitors”
Very expensive to collect and interpret
What is measured tends to be what can be measured … Easy to measure activity, but is this
meaningful? Number of objects conserved
– Surely better if objects don’t need conservation? Number of new acquisitions
– What does this indicate???
So are all numbers bad, or are there good numbers?
Numbers1974, 1989: UKIC - collections care
1982: Raynor scrutinies
1988: NAO - documentation + accountability
1989: Cost of Collecting
1996: Surveys - collections condition etc
1990s -’00s:Government funding agreements / Performance Indicators
1998-9: DOMUS museum census
2000-02 (then died): QUEST unit
2004: (and others) Government Efficiency Review
2003: Government stores survey
Etc, etc, etc
Words1988: Museum registration
scheme
1992 - : Standards for curating …
2004: Accreditation
2008: McMaster: Supporting excellence in the arts
Registration, accreditation
Defined standards for - Governance and museum management User services Collections management
Accreditation - collections management Acquisition / disposal policy Documentation procedures Documentation of objects Plan for documentation backlog Minimise risk and damage to collection Security for collection
How to make sense of the number soup and create useful numbers?
a) Think systemsb) Think risks
c) Think public value
Researchintellectualcollection
Preserve,maintaincollection
Facilitate ŌuseÕ- actual andintellectual
Organise asarchive
Keep safe +secure
Build physicalcollection
Account forphysical
collection
Efficient?Effective?
Efficaceous?
a) For good numbers, think system
3 e’s for managing a system Is it efficient? - e.g., cost / benefit: how much do
objects cost to store per object? (less the better)
Is it effective? - e.g. is the storage preserving the collection and making objects accessible? (sufficient per object)
Is it efficaceous? - e.g. is the collection meeting the requirements of the system ‘ owner’? (Museum: are the objects okay to use?) (Government: is the collection delivering public value?)
Government: Are the collections delivering public value?
Museum: Are the collections fit for purpose? Cost effectively managed? Risks understood?
Operational unit: Are we preserving the objects?
Systems within systems … one system’s objectives = another system’s measures
Objectives
Objectives
Measures
Measures
b) For good numbers, think risks - Rob Waller, Canada
Risk vs. Collection Unit
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
4 12 1 8 2 10 18 9 13 11 19 6 3 7 15 16 5 17 14Collection Unit
Fra
ctio
n lo
st /
Cen
tury
Risk Assessment Steps
l Define scope
l Divide collection into units to assess
l Identify risks to assess
l Quantify risks
l Analyze and present results
l Plan collection care projects
l Refine estimates through research
Calculate priority for action by - The largest number of objects The most vulnerable collections The most valuable objects The most severe / urgent risks
c) Think public valuePreserved for everyone
Visited by many
Inspiration to some
Pivotal experienceto a significant few
Kinds of public value
InstrumentalInstitutional
Intrinsic
“capacity + potential of culture
to affect us”
public services,trust and
mutual respect
eg, employmenteducation
creative economy‘inclusion’
Public values
the value collections create for individuals the value collections create for society the value collections create for the nation
Public value from collections is created by people using them for - Learning and education Research History and memory Beauty and aesthetics Enjoyment
Non-user values Yet even people who don’t use [cultural
resources] value them - Option - might want them one day Existence - like to know they are there Bequest - want them to be there for their children Prestige - enhance the importance of their city /
country
Not publicly valued - not sustainable
Collections have INTRINSIC value - existence, option, inheritance, prestige
Collections have
INSTRUMENTAL value - from services delivered, experiences, etc
The more people experience this ...
The more they will value this
Does sustainable collection management require
statistics?Can’t
live with them
Can’t
live without
them
An unsustainable collection … Added to without thinking about the costs and
consequences Objects not documented Objects neglected so that they deteriorate Objects can’t be found, so can’t be accounted for Storage arrangements are far too elaborate and
energy intensive The public can’t find out what is in the collections The public are prevented from accessing or
using the collections
Useful numbers
200 m. objects
80% of collections are used by less than 10 people a
week
97% of museums report a steady or increasing demand for access to collections
nationallocal public
independent
university
5 - 10% of objects are on
display
2,000 museums
National
Local publicIndependent
University
Other
Benchmarking via basic census, rarely taken
Statistics for specific museum
Compared to nationally, is our collection …
Of sufficient public value for it to be preserved? If not, then -
Decrease the collection or increase the value? (by increasing the use)
If yes, then - Are we preserving it well enough? What is environmentally sustainable and proportionate? How do we measure if we are getting it right?