Hi all,

I'm Kelly Richmond, the intern who will be working for AMICO this summer. Jennifer asked me to write up a summary of observations made from being in the AMICO booth during the Museums & the Web conference, and she wanted me to post them here to hopefully generate some discussion.

So, please review and chime in! thanks, Kelly

Museums and the Web Conference AMICO booth observations

Overall observations

Because the community at the conference was a self-selected one, the awareness of AMICO was generally high.

Interest and excitement about the AMICO database and concept seemed strong.

Members In general, the collections management people and registrars of organizations seemed, understandably, more possessive about the artwork and so, had more trepidation about participation in AMICO.

Those who held education positions within museums were quite excited about the AMICO concept and wanted their institutions to sign up as soon as possible.

Internal communication within participating museums needs to be cultivated. Access to the AMICO database is not being stressed from internal group to group. (I had a woman from the Contemporary Art Museum of Montreal have to ask me if her museum was part of the consortium. So to whom does she need to talk to within her organization to get access when she returns? Will this process be a streamlined one?)

Some current Member organizations were confused that the entire AMICO database was available as thumbnails on the Web. They thought it was just a sample of the works, not all 40,000 of them. They felt this fact could be made clearer in AMICO materials.

Subscribers Potential subscriber organizations were interested in the costs. Was it free? If not, how much?

Also, potential subscribers were curious about how the license agreement worked. What were the restraints on where a subscriber could utilize the images from AMICO?

Potential subscribers found the quality of the images excellent. Also, they were excited about the prospect of being able to download the images.

Potential subscribers liked the Notebook feature and would like to see group downloads available in this function.

Possible subscriber organizations were curious as to whether just artworks were in the database or if other things had been submitted; architecture was specifically asked about.

Statewide initiatives are getting underway which bundle all museums, libraries, universities, etc. together in collective holding databases. Does AMICO need to think about subscriberships to meet that institutional format?

Summary Thoughts

Does the decision to participate in AMICO start at the Executive Director level in a museum? If so,

á Who are the other constituents in an organization to utilize AMICO?

á How does the participation/utilization message get filtered through an organization once the decision has been made?

á What materials are needed in museums to effectively communicate the presence of AMICO once participation has begun?

á How can we use our internal advocates (Museum Educators) to evangelize AMICO before and after initial participation has been approved?

á How do we allay the fears and overcome the objections of our Doubting Thomases (Museum Collections/Registrars) to get them on-board with participation?

Although I originally wrote these questions for Member organizations, similar ones apply to Subscriber institutions as well.