Musings from Museums Australia 2009: Works in Progress

Comment by Rohn Jay Miller on May 20, 2009 at 12:08am

Exploring coalitions of institutions collaborating on building social networks using the successful examples of open source---each contributing assets, people, reputation and a little money to build things that are bigger.

Examples could be education networks, content management systems, CRM and fund raising. Why does each institution have to invent it's own initiative in a time of economic distress when the need for our institutions to succeed is so great?

Comment by Lynda Kelly on May 20, 2009 at 6:31pm

Just chatting to our Marketing Manager and she asked what new big idea came from the conference and I struggled a bit I must say (she did like the vintage bag I bought however!).

I guess I learned that we are all doing amazing things in Australia with limited resource and are generous sharers. I also realised the power of the F2F meet-up and that it can't all be done online.

Finally, I learned that I could attend two conferences at once #ma2009 and #futuresummit!

It was also great to meet so many Museum 3.0'ers there and get feedback about our network.

Comment by Patrick Watt on May 20, 2009 at 6:50pm

I wish I could have been there...given our MAPDA award!!! I was at the IMTAP meeting on Sunday..at least in a phone hook up. It's bad timing for Victorians as every school is out and about for Education Week.
I did go to a great seminar last night at the State Library of Victoria: a discussion on learning and new technologies.

Comment by Linda Young on May 21, 2009 at 11:00am

For me the MA conference is my tribal gathering, a great occasion for seeing folk, even though one needs to have lunch with each of them for really satisfactory talk. And I am always knocked out by the adventurous projects going on, and what's being learned from them. Hence I was very glad to hear Paula Bray on the PHM Flickr Commons, and Isobel Kindley and Karen Griffiths on volunteers, and Lindie Ward on the Australian dress register. The most inspiring paper I hear was Tiina Roppola on her model of visitors' modes of responding to exhibitions.
Convergence was surely the big idea under discussion. But I think it's the wrong kind of convergence, merely a pendulum swing back to 19thC museum-gallery-library unity, under the rubric of 'collecting', blessed by rationalisation of resources (maybe). But collecting is far from the only thing museums etc do. If we look to our core values, what we're about is heritage - conserving, communicating, using it in the present to explain the past and shape the future. I think convergence should be towards uniting intangible heritage and place heritage and object heritage.

Comment by Laura Miles on May 21, 2009 at 11:53am

Lynda - thanks for starting this thread. Once again I'd like to shamelessly spruik next year's conference which will be in Melbourne at the end of September (www.ma2010.com.au). As co-chair/host of the conference I'll be interested to read NINGers' views on all things conference to feed into the planning process. Thanks all!

Comment by Liz Holcombe on May 21, 2009 at 4:10pm

Particpate more, and do more about working across existing groups and structures. Oh, and getting a better gadget to communicate with. Ancient laptops plus no wireless at conference venues make for a very frustrating situation. (Okay, I cheated, that is sort of three ideas - but I promise they are related.)

Comment by Pauline Fitzgerald on May 21, 2009 at 5:14pm

Laura - for next year I think a less is more concept would be good- fewer speakers and more opportunity to discuss the issues they raise.The format of 3 speakers felt very rushed and maybe it would be better to have 2 speakers and then half an hour to open the floor for discussion. I think we can all learn so much from each other. The chair for each session could I'm sure facilitate a really rich discussion of the experiences of the keynote speakers.

Comment by Laura Miles on May 21, 2009 at 5:57pm

Thanks - this is all *very* useful feedback.

Comment by Frank Howarth on May 21, 2009 at 6:44pm

Hi Laura (and all),
A bit of feedback from the Director perspective. I enjoyed being at the Newcastle conference, meeting new colleagues and catching up with others.
I strongly endorse the need for more discussion time. We have to harness the knowledge and views of attendees, not just speakers. We also need to use the overseas speakers better. It would have been great if Victoria Lu had been able to give a master class on how to sign up corporate supporters, and to have had her as a participant in a wider discussion on this, in an Australian context.
The conference needs to balance the needs and interests of regional versus city, and frontline versus strategists/directors. As a director, I would like to have seen more of my colleagues there, but we need things that will attract them (as AAM do at there somewhat larger gatherings). For example, some crystal ball gazing on the big issues facing us, and the big opportunities (eg web 2.0). For this, I prefer debates/discussions, not set piece speaches (unless they are guaranteed to be provocative). and lets get some "great debate" style humour and controversy back. I look forward to Melbourne next year... Frank

Comment by Gillian Savage on May 21, 2009 at 11:01pm

I missed the freedom of different formats like

> exhibition reviews / comment and feedback on work done in any format
> Pecha Kucha format (20 slides with 20 secs per slide) - it's like Poetry Slam
> debates, exchanges, discussions, small groups, etc... ferment/foment
> audience prize for best 'something'
> some round tables

I appreciated the 'Memorials' session because it gave space for a different perspective to shine through.

I'd like to see a more interactive web presence associated with the conference.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page