Manifesto for a New Mobile Architecture
Posted by Nancy Proctor on | April 25, 2009 | 3 Comments
In the beginning…
Whether given by live guides or prerecorded on tape, the first museum tours were linear: ———-
From starting point A to end point N, the exhibits interpreted on the tour were strung along the tour’s linear route like pearls of wisdom on a necklace: -o-o-o-o-o-
The value of the tour was measured in stops: o
The messiness, but also the magic, happened in the spaces between the exhibit commentary or ‘stops’ on the tour: -
People got lost in the interstitial spaces, uncertain of where to find the next stop (o), or lost track of where they were in the audio tour tape: -o-o-o-?
Or they got bored, or distracted, or tired of following the herd, or simply decided to get off the tour at the last stop:-o-o-o~§
But in the best linear tours, the spaces in-between were where it all happened: that was where you got the background information and context that brought the exhibits to life: -o!o!o!
The connective tissue of the tour immersed you in music and storytelling that carried you along effortlessly from one stop to another, transporting you to a different, magical world. In some courageous tours, the liminal spaces were an opportunity for audience participation. The tour could issue challenges to the visitors to play games, complete tasks, or simply give time to share impressions with a companion. The more marketing-minded tours gestures towards galleries and exhibits along the way as opportunities to return and find out more in another tour: -o+o+o+
Fear and impatience with the messiness prevailed, however, and the second generation of audio tour technology introduced ‘random access’ tours. Visitors could choose which exhibits they saw and hence which stops they listened to absolutely at random.
o o o
o oo o o
o o
It was the first digital ‘personalization’ in museum tours, and was promoted in Modernist terms as a liberation from the herd by ambitious vendors, eager to recoup their investment in the new technology and steal a march on the competition. Thanks to the new technology, we could finally ‘do our own thing’ in the museum.
But as my friend, Laura Mann, a veteran of the audio tour industry, put it: “We lost something when we moved away from the linear tour.”
This is a manifesto for recovering that magic – and even some of the messiness – in museum tours.
Comments
3 Responses to “Manifesto for a New Mobile Architecture”
Leave a Reply
Search
What’s New
- inSitu Solutions™ by Kanvasys
- Products & Services
- My Tours
- Exhibitly (in progress)
- MCN Annual Conference 16-19 Nov 2011, Atlanta
- Museum-Mobile online conference
- AAM's Technology, Interpretation and Education 2011
- Exhibitly Needs Your Help!
- Virtuality, Technology & Feminism in the Museum
- DC Area Mobile Collaborations
Login
Mailing LIst
Loading...
May 6th, 2009 @ 2:17 pm
Smithsonian multi-platform audio tour
I’ve recently conducted two museum evaluation studies that are similar to the Smithsonian multi-platform audio tour pilot program
Tate-Britain:
The first study was for the Tate-Britain’s Turner Prize mobile phone tour (Dec, 07). The design of the research not only surveyed the mobile users experience it also, importantly, surveyed Turner non-users awareness of the mobile tour and barriers to usage. A third sample group, among general Tate-Britain visitors outside the Turner Exhibit, provided a broader view of visitor interests, expectations barriers to mobile phone guides.
Results showed that Turner mobile users generally had a positive experience (less a few technical problems). However, the results among Turner non-users highlighted the barriers many visitors had to using mobile phone guides. Key barrier were a lack of understanding of how the tour worked (many had only basic phones), how much it would cost (about one-third resided outside the UK) and the appropriateness of using a mobile phone in a museum. The results among general Tate-Britain visitors confirmed these barriers and quantified others.
However, important to the study’s design was assessing mobile tour user pre- and-post views toward using a mobile phone tour. These results were more encouraging. Specifically, the likelihood to use a mobile tour in the future jumped significantly after taking a mobile phone tour, illustrating that there is a likely market for mobile phone tours (especially on smart phones) after barriers to usage are overcome.
Tate-Liverpool:
The second study was an evaluation of the iTouch multi-media for the Gustav Klimt exhibit at Tate-Liverpool (Jul, 08). The objectives of this study were to assess the iTouch user experience, and in particular the presentation of multi-media content, and assess awareness of a downloadable tour via the museum’s site or while at the exhibit through the museum’s wireless connection.
Results showed users of the iTouch guide rated their preference for multi-media vs audio only content higher than non-users and importantly showed that young and old visitors found the device easy to use. Awareness of the downloadable version, however, rated very low (below 5%) illustrating that few visitors expected and/or searched for downloadable tours.
Pilot Study Suggestions:
Essential to the research design of the American Art multi-platform pilot test is the development of key sample groups that will allow for a comprehensive evaluation of content, platform and marketing communications. Additionally, the survey instrument should include relevant questions about consumer behavior and expectations so that key target consumer segments can be develop to assist in optimizing platform positioning and targeted marketing-communications.
At minimum I would suggest including a user and a non-user sample that would represent a cross section of visitors. Based on platform usage rates the user sample may need to be recruited to ensure adequate sample size.
January 3rd, 2010 @ 10:20 pm
[...] My manifesto for a new mobile information architecture [...]
June 28th, 2010 @ 7:50 pm
[...] 29, 2010 12:50 am http://wiki.museummobile.info/archives/62 45.434336 [...]